Despite advances in preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic interventions, invasive fungal infections cause significant morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients. The burden of antifungal resistance in such high-risk patients is becoming a major concern. A better understanding of the mechanisms and clinical impact of antifungal resistance is essential to the prompt and efficient treatment of patients with invasive mycoses and to improving the outcome of such infections. Although recent guidelines have attempted to standardize antifungal susceptibility testing, limitations still exist as a result of the incomplete correlation between in vitro susceptibility and clinical response to treatment. Four major mechanisms of resistance to azoles have been identified, all of which rely on altered gene expression. Mechanisms responsible for polyene and echinocandin resistance are less well understood. In addition to discussing the molecular mechanisms of antifungal resistance, this article elaborates on the concept of clinical resistance, which is critical to the understanding of treatment failure in patients with invasive fungal infections.

In this large, prospective, multinational cohort, more than one half of all cases of non-HACEK gram-negative bacillus endocarditis were associated with health care contact. Non-HACEK gram-negative bacillus endocarditis is not primarily a disease of injection drug users.

The results from two methodologically identical double-blind studies indicate that telavancin is noninferior to vancomycin based on clinical response in the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia due to Gram-positive pathogens.

Hemodialysis-dependent patients with MSSA bacteremia treated with vancomycin are at a higher risk of experiencing treatment failure than are those receiving cefazolin. In the absence of patient specific circumstances (e.g., allergy to beta-lactams), vancomycin should not be continued beyond empirical therapy for hemodialysis-dependent patients with MSSA bacteremia.

No abstract