Acute infective endocarditis during COVID-19 pandemic time: The dark side of the moon.

The COVID-19 pandemic has remarkably impacted the hospital management and the profile of patients suffering from acute cardiovascular syndromes. Among them, acute infective endocarditis (AIE) represented a rather frequent part of these urgent/emergent procedures. The paper by Liu et al. has clearly shown the higher risk features which patients with a diagnosis of AIE presented at hospital admission during the first part (first and second waves) of the outbreak, often requiring challenging operations, but fortunately not associated with the worse outcome if compared to results obtained before the SARS-2 pandemic. The report discussed herein presents several other aspects worth discussion and comments, particularly in relation to hospital management and postdischarge outcome which certainly deserve to be highlighted, but also further investigations.

Outcomes After Tricuspid Valve Operations in Patients With Drug-Use Infective Endocarditis.

The increase of intravenous drug use has led to an increase in right-sided infective endocarditis and its complications including septic pulmonary embolism. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of tricuspid valve (TV) operations in patients with drug-use infective endocarditis (DU-IE) complicated by septic pulmonary emboli (PE). Hospitalizations for DU-IE complicated by septic PE were identified from the National Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2019. Outcomes of patients who underwent TV operations were compared with medical management. The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiogenic shock, or cardiac arrest. An inverse probability of treatment weighted analysis was utilized to adjust for the differences between the cohorts. A total of 9,029 cases of DU-IE with septic PE were identified (mean age 33.6 years), of which 818 patients (9.1%) underwent TV operation. Surgery was associated with a higher rate of MACE (14.5% vs 10.8%, p <0.01), driven by a higher rate of cardiogenic shock (6.1% vs 1.2%, p <0.01) but a lower rate of mortality (2.7% vs 5.7%, p <0.01). Moreover, TV operation was associated with an increased need for permanent pacemakers, blood transfusions, and a higher risk of acute kidney injury. In the inverse probability treatment weighting analysis, TV operation was associated with an increased risk for MACE driven by a higher rate of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest, but a lower rate of mortality when compared with medical therapy alone. In conclusion, TV operations in patients with DU-IE complicated by septic PE are associated with an increased risk for MACE but a decreased risk of mortality. Although surgical management may be beneficial in some patients, alternative options such as percutaneous debulking should be considered given the higher risk.

Management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and endocarditis: progresses and challenges.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Staphylococcus aureus is among the leading causes of community-acquired as well as healthcare-associated and hospital-acquired bacteremia and endocarditis. The purpose of this review was to analyze most recent data relevant to the clinical management of S. aureus bacteremia (SAB) and endocarditis. RECENT FINDINGS: Population-based studies have shown that the incidence of SAB has not decreased in the last years and that healthcare-associated and nosocomial cases continue to account for at least half of SAB. In some areas where methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) now has become common, MRSA strains with reduced vancomycin susceptibility may have emerged and account for a significant proportion. These strains increase the likelihood of treatment failures, though overall outcomes may often be similarly poor in drug-susceptible S. aureus, which must not be neglected as a pathogen causing potentially lethal infection. Many aspects of drug therapy such as continuous versus intermittent infusion of antibiotics or combination therapy continue to be discussed controversially. Few major progresses in the clinical management have been made in the last few years, but there is evidence that the case fatality can be modestly reduced by efforts focussed on sustained high-quality clinical management. SUMMARY: SAB remains a serious, potentially lethal infection, which is too often nosocomial and healthcare-associated. A threat has been the increasing drug resistance of S. aureus seen in many parts of the world and spreading among community isolates. Improved outcomes with new drugs have not been shown convincingly. Large clinical trials assessing the benefits of combination therapies are needed.

Prevention of infective endocarditis: guidelines from the American Heart Association: a guideline from the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, and the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this statement is to update the recommendations by the American Heart Association (AHA) for the prevention of infective endocarditis that were last published in 1997. METHODS AND RESULTS: A writing group was appointed by the AHA for their expertise in prevention and treatment of infective endocarditis, with liaison members representing the American Dental Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and the American Academy of Pediatrics. The writing group reviewed input from national and international experts on infective endocarditis. The recommendations in this document reflect analyses of relevant literature regarding procedure-related bacteremia and infective endocarditis, in vitro susceptibility data of the most common microorganisms that cause infective endocarditis, results of prophylactic studies in animal models of experimental endocarditis, and retrospective and prospective studies of prevention of infective endocarditis. MEDLINE database searches from 1950 to 2006 were done for English-language papers using the following search terms: endocarditis, infective endocarditis, prophylaxis, prevention, antibiotic, antimicrobial, pathogens, organisms, dental, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, streptococcus, enterococcus, staphylococcus, respiratory, dental surgery, pathogenesis, vaccine, immunization, and bacteremia. The reference lists of the identified papers were also searched. We also searched the AHA online library. The American College of Cardiology/AHA classification of recommendations and levels of evidence for practice guidelines were used. The paper was subsequently reviewed by outside experts not affiliated with the writing group and by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. CONCLUSIONS: The major changes in the updated recommendations include the following: (1) The Committee concluded that only an extremely small number of cases of infective endocarditis might be prevented by antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures even if such prophylactic therapy were 100% effective. (2) Infective endocarditis prophylaxis for dental procedures is reasonable only for patients with underlying cardiac conditions associated with the highest risk of adverse outcome from infective endocarditis. (3) For patients with these underlying cardiac conditions, prophylaxis is reasonable for all dental procedures that involve manipulation of gingival tissue or the periapical region of teeth or perforation of the oral mucosa. (4) Prophylaxis is not recommended based solely on an increased lifetime risk of acquisition of infective endocarditis. (5) Administration of antibiotics solely to prevent endocarditis is not recommended for patients who undergo a genitourinary or gastrointestinal tract procedure. These changes are intended to define more clearly when infective endocarditis prophylaxis is or is not recommended and to provide more uniform and consistent global recommendations.

How important are dental procedures as a cause of infective endocarditis?

Eighteen pediatric patients with infective endocarditis (IE) were reviewed for "failure" of chemoprophylaxis; none had had a previous dental procedure. Surprisingly, published reports reveal a similarly low prevalence of dental extractions preceding IE, only 3.6% for 1,322 cases. Although bacteremia was associated with 40% of 2,403 reported extractions, it also was found in 38% of patients after mastication, and in 11% of patients with oral sepsis and no intervention. In a hypothetical month, ending with a single dental extraction, the cumulative exposure to these "physiologic" sources of bacteremia is nearly 1,000 times greater than it is from extraction. The current American Heart Association recommendations for intramuscular or intravenous chemoprophylaxis are impractical, and the discomfort and inconvenience may impede good dental care. The Committee also implies that gingival bleeding allows bacterial access to the blood stream, whereas experimental studies establish the lymphatics as the only access. Although oral chemoprophylaxis for major dental procedures appears prudent, the British regimen of a single dose of amoxicillin administered orally is much simpler and probably more effective. However, scrupulous oral and dental hygiene is undoubtedly superior in preventing IE than any chemoprophylaxis regimen.

Nosocomial infective endocarditis.

SUMMARY: Nosocomial infective endocarditis (NIE) is a rare complication of nosocomial bacteraemia; however, it is an infection of great importance because of its high mortality and because in many cases it is potentially preventable. Whilst many aspects of NIE are similar to community-acquired infective endocarditis (CIE), there are important differences between the two, most notably the predisposing factors, microbial aetiology and prognosis. The diagnosis of NIE is often difficult as many patients have severe underlying disease and coexistent infection elsewhere. Many of these infections could potentially be prevented by the identification of high risk patients, careful assessment of positive blood cultures and effective treatment of bacteraemia in high risk patients. The use of prophylactic antimicrobials in the prevention of infective endocarditis is unproven, however, it is recommended that prophylaxis be considered for certain invasive hospital-based procedures.

[Outcome of prognostic factors of infectious endocarditis over a 16 year period. Apropos of 471 cases]. / Evolution des facteurs pronostiques de l'endocardite infectieuse sur une période de 16 ans. A propos de 471 observations.

Four hundred and seventy one cases of infective endocarditis (IE) were reviewed: 338 native valve IE and 133 prosthetic valve IE (42 early and 91 late IE). Two periods were compared: 1973-1980 (250 cases) and 1981-1988 (221 cases). There was a decrease in native valve IE (78% to 64%) and an increase in late prosthetic valve IE (13% to 27%), little change with respect to age, causal cardiac disease, delay in diagnosis (except in native valve IE, 39 to 29 days), or frequency of complications, especially cardiac (50% and 51%). However, global mortality decreased from 41% to 27% (p < 0.001). The evolution of the frequency of cardiac complications, cardiac surgery and mortality for the two periods was: for native valve IE respectively 53% to 42%, 41% to 37%, 37% to 20% (p < 0.005); for early prosthetic valve IE respectively, 45% to 55%, 41% to 55%, and 82% to 50% (p < 0.05); for late prosthetic IE, respectively 34% to 69%, 34% to 69% and 37% to 36%. The frequency of surgery had therefore little influence on prognosis except in early prosthetic valve IE. The percentage of infections which could not be controlled medically decreased from 17% to 11%. The mortality of unoperated patients decreased from 46% to 28% (p < 0.01), suggesting more effective antibiotherapy, and the mortality of operated patients fell from 34% to 26%. Global surgical mortality was 35% in the acute phase (positive valve culture), 14% after sterilisation (p < 0.001) and the corresponding frequencies of paravalvular leaks was 17% and 4% (p < 0.01).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Patient education and the prevention of endocarditis.

Bacterial endocarditis prophylaxis has received scant attention in nursing and medical literature in the past. Nurses must participate in prevention as well as in curative measures to enable patients to enjoy optimal health. Information about the manifestations, risk, and prevention of B.E. as well as successful patient approaches has been presented to assist the reader to recognize susceptible patients and to teach them protective measures.

Acute infective endocarditis.

Acute infective endocarditis is a complex disease with changing epidemiology and a rapidly evolving knowledge base. To consistently achieve optimal outcomes in the management of infective endocarditis, the clinical team must have an understanding of the epidemiology, microbiology, and natural history of infective endocarditis, as well as a grasp of guiding principles of diagnosis and medical and surgical management. The focus of this review is acute infective endocarditis, though many studies of diagnosis and treatment do not differentiate between acute and subacute disease, and indeed many principles of diagnosis and management of infective endocarditis for acute and subacute disease are identical.

New British and American guidelines for the antibiotic prophylaxis of infective endocarditis: do the changes make sense? A critical review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy and the American Heart Association have radically revised their guidelines for the antibiotic prophylaxis of endocarditis. This review discusses the evidence behind the most controversial changes and considers possible future developments. RECENT FINDINGS: The new guidelines emphasize good oral hygiene for preventing viridans streptococcal endocarditis. Antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures is only recommended for patients with the highest-risk cardiac conditions. American Heart Association guidelines no longer recommend prophylaxis for urological and gastrointestinal procedures. SUMMARY: While only up to 6% of endocarditis cases may be prevented by antibiotic prophylaxis there is controversy as to what to recommend for the individual cardiac patient undergoing a given procedure. The new guidelines about dental prophylaxis are based on epidemiological studies that failed to include sufficient subjects undergoing specific interventions. When considering viridans streptococcal rather than total bacteraemia rates, asserting that the prevalence of bacteraemia after invasive dental procedures is similar to that after toothbrushing may be incorrect. The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy report probably overestimates the risk of fatal anaphylaxis after an oral dose of amoxicillin. In contrast, the American Heart Association guidelines comment on the absence of any reports of fatal anaphylaxis associated with the antibiotic prophylaxis of endocarditis.

The prophylaxis of infective endocarditis: current practices in France. French Federation of Cardiology.

Over the last 10 years, the French Federation of Cardiology has circulated recommendations regarding the use of chemoprophylaxis in patients at risk for infective endocarditis. A national survey conducted in 1991, however, showed that the vast majority of both general practitioners and dentists were unaware of these recommendations. Therefore, a Consensus Conference was convened in 1992, with the object of defining and circulating new guidelines which were to be as practical as possible, for the prophylaxis of infective endocarditis. The Consensus Conference first defined which categories of subjects were at risk for infective endocarditis and which types of procedures were potential causes of endocarditis. The second task of the Conference was to determine recommendations for chemoprophylaxis before procedures at risk. For ambulatory dental procedures, a single oral dose of 3 g of amoxicillin administered in the hour preceding the procedure was recommended. Additional recommendations were made for subjects with an allergy to penicillin, for procedures requiring general anaesthesia or for urologic or digestive tract procedures. These recommendations were printed on credit-card format cards and distributed to all practising cardiologists, who were encouraged to give each of their patients at risk a personal card bearing his/her name and the type of heart condition at risk. It is hoped that these measures to both simplify the prophylactic antibiotic regimen and circulate the recommendations from the Consensus Conference may reduce the incidence of this still severe disease.

Prevention of infective endocarditis: the view from the United States.

The American Heart Association's recommendations for the prevention of infective endocarditis were first published in February, 1955, and the most recent (fifth revision) in December, 1984. The somewhat controversial nature of these recommendations reflects several issues, including the degree to which infective endocarditis in man is preventable and the relative safety of alternative regimens. Nevertheless, it is apparent that a reasonable fraction of cases are preventable and that antibiotics for this purpose are appropriate. It is also clear that certain patient groups, i.e. those with prosthetic valves or surgically constructed systemic-pulmonary shunts, are at greatest risk and warrant more intensive, primarily parenteral antibiotic regimens. Particularly controversial are recommendations related to the very large group of patients with mitral valve prolapse. The latest American Heart Association recommendations are presented in detail.

[Infective endocarditis: a changing disease]. / Endocardite infettiva: una malattia in evoluzione.

Infective endocarditis is best characterized as a disease in evolution. The list of patients at risk, which formerly included almost exclusively patients with rheumatic heart disease, is being continuously modified and expanded. Nowadays, patients with prosthetic heart valves, users of illicit intravenous drugs, and patients with mitral valve prolapse rather than patients with rheumatic heart disease account for the majority of cases of infective endocarditis. Moreover, due to the widespread use of indwelling atrial catheters for parenteral nutrition as well as for intensive cytotoxic therapy, catheter-related right-sided endocarditis is emerging among nosocomial infections. With the advent of successful antimicrobial therapy, complications rather than endocardial infection pose the major therapeutic problems. In addition to progressive heart failure, myocardial abscesses, fungal endocarditis, relapsing infection, and major systemic emboli in the presence of large protuberant vegetations constitute indications for replacement of the valve. Despite progresses in diagnosis and therapy, infective endocarditis will most likely continue to challenge physicians even in the next future.

Prosthetic valve endocarditis: an overview.

Infection of an intracardiac prosthesis, the incidence of which is about 2.5% among patients having undergone valve replacement, is a serious complication with considerable morbidity and mortality. Early prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE), with an onset within 60 days of valve replacement, accounts for approximately one-third of all cases, while the remaining two-thirds, occur more than two months postoperatively (late prosthetic valve endocarditis). Prosthetic valve endocarditis is most commonly caused by Staphylococcus epidermidis, less frequently by viridans streptococci, Staphylococcus aureus, and gram-negative bacilli. The most likely pathogenetic mechanisms in prosthetic valve endocarditis are intraoperative contamination and postoperative infections at extracardiac sites. Prominent clinical features include fever, new or changing heart murmurs, leukocytosis, anemia and hematuria. The etiologic microorganism can be isolated in more than 90% of all cases. Patients with proven prosthetic valve endocarditis should be examined daily to detect signs of congestive heart failure and changes in murmurs; electrocardiographic monitoring is essential for documentation of arrhythmias. With limitations, echocardiography, especially two-dimensional, may help to demonstrate vegetations or valvular dehiscence. Cinefluoroscopy may reveal loosening or dehiscence of the sewing ring or impaired motion of a radio-opaque poppet due to thrombus or vegetation. Cardiac catheterization, not always necessary even when surgical intervention is anticipated, may provide valuable information on the degree of dysfunction, multiple valve involvement, left ventricular function and extent of concomitant coronary artery disease. In patients with mechanical valves, prosthetic valve endocarditis may be associated with a high incidence of valve ring and myocardial abscesses; the reported frequency of valve ring abscesses is lower with porcine heterografts. Infections on mechanical valves characteristically localize to the sewing ring with subsequent detachment of the prosthesis and valvular incompetence; infections on porcine heterografts tend to localize to the cusps, leading to valvular incompetence because of leaflet destruction. Large vegetations may result in functional stenosis. Over the last ten years the overall mortality of prosthetic valve endocarditis was 53.8%; 73.6% in early and 43% in late prosthetic valve endocarditis. More recently, however, the survival rate appears to be improving. In general, the mortality associated with prosthetic valve endocarditis caused by fungi and Staphylococcus aureus is highest and that of streptococci lowest.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)