Download PDFPDF
Selective fluconazole prophylaxis in high-risk babies to reduce invasive fungal infection
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Practical approach to improve prophylaxis against fungal infections
    • Yoram A Bental, Neonatologist
    • Other Contributors:
      • Imad R. Makhoul- Meyer Children's Hospital and The Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine-Technion, Israel.

    áñ"ã To the Editor, We read with interest the article by McCrossan et al on selective fluconazole prophylaxis. Reviewing the data presented in Table 2, in 3 out of 4 infants with positive blood culture, cephalosporin was involved. A practical conclusion would be to eliminate the use of cephalosporin in VLBW infants. Another measure would be to shorten empiric antibiotic use to 3-4 days (if cultures prove to be negative)...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Prophylaxis to reduce fungal infection in neonates
    • Renato S Procianoy, Professor of Pediatrics, Head of the Newborn Section
    • Other Contributors:
      • Rita.C. Silveira

    The study by McCrossan et al showed that fluconazole prophylaxis in a selected group of preterm infants with birth weight less than 1,500 grams decreases invasive fungal infection [1]. We agree that a carefully delineated risk-factor approach to the prevention of Candida infection in neonates may be a useful alternative to continuous fluconazole prophylaxis and may decrease the risk of the emergence of fluconazole-resistan...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.