Antifungal Use in Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease: A Western Australian Perspective

Background Perforated peptic ulcer disease has a high mortality rate, and there is consensus regarding the use of antifungals in the management of immunocompromised patients; however, there is variability in the utilization of antifungals in the non-immunocompromised cohort. This study aims to describe the current practice related to the use of antifungals in perforated peptic ulcer disease in Western Australia and to determine the peri-operative morbidity and mortality in the immunocompromised and non-immunocompromised cohort receiving antifungals. Methods Medical records of patients who underwent surgical repair of perforated peptic ulcer in all Western Australian tertiary hospitals between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were reviewed retrospectively. Data regarding pre-operative patient factors such as age, gender, and comorbidities, post-operative outcomes such as intra-abdominal sepsis/bleeding, peri-operative antifungal prescription, and abundance of fungal growth on intra-operative samples were collected. Results The study included 359 patients. The antifungal prescription was variable. An American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of 3 or more, presence of pre-operative shock and acidosis, and level of abundance of fungal growth on intra-operative samples were associated with antifungal prescription. Amongst the non-immunocompromised cohort, receiving antifungals was associated with higher morbidity. Conclusion The use of antifungals for patients with perforated peptic ulcer disease was variable. An ASA score of 3 or greater and pre-operative shock and acidosis are pre-operative factors predisposing patients to receiving antifungals. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality amongst immunocompromised patients regardless of antifungal prescription or non-prescription. However, in the non-immunocompromised cohort, those who received antifungals had a higher morbidity compared to those who did not.