Analysis highlights changes in candidemia incidence and species distribution in Costa Rica, indicating implications for treatment.
Background The epidemiology of candidemia has shown significant variations over time. This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on candidemia patterns in Costa Rica.Incidence of CandidemiaIncidence of Candidemia in Costa Rica (2007-2023)Temporal EvolutionTemporal Evolution of Main Candida Species (2007-2023) Methods We analyzed 2,128 candidemia cases from two tertiary hospitals in Costa Rica across three distinct periods: pre-pandemic (2007-2019, n=1,658), pandemic (2020-2021, n=256), and post-pandemic (2022-2023, n=214). Results Candidemia incidence showed significant temporal variations: increasing from 0.119/100 discharges (2007) to 0.283/100 (2014), followed by fluctuations until rising significantly during the pandemic (0.266/100 discharges vs. 0.205/100 pre-pandemic), and subsequently decreasing post-pandemic (0.193/100). The pandemic marked a critical inflection point in species distribution (χ²=73.41, p< 0.001). C. parapsilosis dominance (47.8% pre-pandemic) diminished progressively (40.6% during pandemic, 29.0% post-pandemic), while C. albicans increased (29.7%, 35.2%, and 40.2%, respectively). C. tropicalis showed sustained increases from pre-pandemic (7.8%) to post-pandemic periods (14.5%). Mixed candidemia cases increased from none (2007-2010) to 5.6% (2023), with notable absence during 2021. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic represents a significant inflection point in candidemia epidemiology in Costa Rica, with persistent post-pandemic shifts in species distribution. The emergence of C. albicans as the dominant species over C. parapsilosis post-pandemic represents a significant epidemiological transition with important clinical implications for empirical treatment strategies and infection control practices. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cordero et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: