Evaluation of the Specificity of the 2023 Duke-International Society of Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases Classification for Infective Endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: The 2023 Duke-ISCVID (International Society of Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases) classification is a new diagnostic tool for infective endocarditis, updating the 2000 modified Duke and the 2015 European Society for Cardiology (ESC) classifications. In comparison, its sensitivity is higher; however, its specificity remains to be evaluated and compared to that of the 2 other classifications in endocarditis suspected patients. METHODS: We retrospectively collected the characteristics of patients hospitalized in Bichat University's Hospital, Paris, in 2021, who had been evaluated for clinical suspicion of endocarditis, have had at least a transthoracic echocardiography, 2 pairs of blood cultures, 3-month follow-up and in whom endocarditis diagnosis was finally rejected. All patients were classified by 2000 modified Duke, 2015 ESC and 2023 Duke-ISCVID, as though the endocarditis diagnosis had not been rejected. RESULTS: In total, 130 patients' charts were analyzed. Mean age was 62 years, 84 (64.6%) were male, 39 (30.0%) had prosthetic cardiac valve or valve repair, 21 (16.2%) cardiac implanted electronic device, and 30 (23.1%) other cardiac conditions. Overall, 5, 2, and 5 patients were falsely classified as definite endocarditis with the 2000 modified Duke, 2015 ESC, and 2023 Duke-ISCVID classifications, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 96.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] [90.8%, 98.6%]), 98.5% (95% CI [93.9%, 99.7%]), and 96.2% (95% CI [90.8%, 98.6%]). The rates of possible endocarditis were of 38%, 35%, and 35% in the 3 classifications, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The 2023 Duke-ISCVID classification is highly specific for ruling out the diagnosis of definite infective endocarditis in patients who had been evaluated for IE.

Compared Performance of the 2023 Duke-International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases, 2000 Modified Duke, and 2015 European Society of Cardiology Criteria for the Diagnosis of Infective Endocarditis in a French Multicenter Prospective Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The 2023 Duke-International Society for Cardiovascular Diseases (ISCVID) criteria for infective endocarditis (IE) were proposed as an updated diagnostic classification of IE. Using an open prospective multicenter cohort of patients treated for IE, we compared the performance of these new criteria to that of the 2000 Modified Duke and 2015 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) criteria. METHODS: Cases of patients treated for IE between January 2017 and October 2022 were adjudicated as certain IE or not. Each case was also categorized as either definite or possible/rejected within each classification. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were estimated with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Of the 1194 patients analyzed (mean age, 66.1 years; 71.2% males), 414 (34.7%) had a prosthetic valve and 284 (23.8%) had a cardiac implanted electronic device (CIED); 946 (79.2%) were adjudicated as certain IE; 978 (81.9%), 997 (83.5%), and 1057 (88.5%) were classified as definite IE in the 2000 modified Duke, 2015 ESC, and 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria, respectively. The sensitivity of each set of criteria was 93.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.6-94.8), 95.0% (95% CI, 93.7-96.4), and 97.6% (95% CI, 96.6-98.6), respectively (P < .001 for all 2-by-2 comparisons). Corresponding specificity rates were 61.3% (95% CI, 55.2-67.4), 60.5% (95% CI, 54.4-66.6), and 46.0% (95% CI, 39.8-52.2), respectively. In patients without CIED, sensitivity rates were 94.8% (95% CI, 93.2-96.4), 96.5% (95% CI, 95.1-97.8), and 97.7% (95% CI, 96.6-98.8); specificity rates were 59.0% (95% CI, 51.6-66.3), 56.6% (95% CI, 49.3-64.0), and 53.8% (95% CI, 46.3-61.2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria had a significantly higher sensitivity but a significantly lower specificity compared with older criteria. This decreased specificity was mainly attributable to patients with CIED.

Predictive performance of surgical mortality risk scores in infective endocarditis.

OBJECTIVES: This observational study aimed to evaluate Association pour l'Etude et la Prévention de l'Endocardite Infectieuse (AEPEI) surgery score predictive performance in comparison to general (EuroSCORE I, II) and specific (De Feo, PALSUSE) surgical risk scores for infective endocarditis (IE). METHODS: The study included patients who underwent surgery for IE during the acute phase at Bichat University Hospital (Paris, France) between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2016 and at Nancy University Hospital (Nancy, France) between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2019. Patients with IE complicating percutaneous aortic valve implantations or implantable intra-cardiac devices were excluded. Discrimination and calibration were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, calibration curves and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality rates were 18% at Bichat and 16% at Nancy. Discrimination was high for all risk scores at Bichat (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.77 for EuroSCORE I, 0.78 for EuroSCORE II, 0.76 for De Feo score, 0.72 for PALSUSE and 0.73 for AEPEI with 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.67 to 0.83), but lower at Nancy (0.56 for EuroSCORE I, 0.65 for EuroSCORE II, 0.63 for De Feo score, 0.67 for PALSUSE and 0.66 for AEPEI score with 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.47 to 0.75). With Brier score, all scores were adequately calibrated in both populations between 0.129 (De Feo) and 0.135 (PALSUSE) for Bichat and between 0.128 (De Feo) and 0.135 (EuroSCORE I) for Nancy. With the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, the AEPEI score exhibited the best calibration (observed/predicted ratio 1.058 in Bichat, 1.087 in Nancy). CONCLUSIONS: This surgical score external validation in 2 large independent populations demonstrated that the AEPEI surgical score had the best predictive performance compared to other prognosis scores. It could be helpful in clinical practice to assist the endocarditis team in decision-making.

Daptomycin compared to standard therapy for the treatment of native valve endocarditis

Introduction In a recent randomized trial of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and native valve endocarditis, daptomycin was found not inferior to standard therapy. We summarized findings in the subgroup of patients with endocarditis according to the Duke criteria. Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive daptomycin 6mg/kg/day or standard therapy (vancomycin 1g every 12h or antistaphylococcal penicillin 2g every 4h, both with gentamicin 1mg/kg every 8h for the first 4 days). The primary end point was success in the modified intent-to-treat population 6 weeks after the end of therapy.Results Fifty-three patients were included: 35 with right-sided endocarditis (RIE) and 18 with left-sided endocarditis (LIE). The success rates in patients with RIE were similar between daptomycin and the comparator (42% vs 44%). Patients with RIE with septic pulmonary infarcts responded similarly to treatment with daptomycin and standard therapy (60% vs 67%). In the LIE population, treatment success rates were poor in both arms (11% vs 22%).Conclusion Daptomycin is an efficacious and well-tolerated alternative to standard therapy in the treatment of RIE. Patients with LIE had a poor outcome regardless of the treatment received. Daptomycin is also effective in treating endocarditis with septic pulmonary infarcts (AU)

Introducción En un reciente ensayo aleatorizado sobre bacteriemia por Staphylococcus aureus y endocarditis de la válvula natural, daptomicina no resultó inferior a la terapéutica estándar. Resumimos los hallazgos en el subgrupo de pacientes con endocarditis según los criterios de Duke.MétodosLos pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente a recibir daptomicina, 6mg/kg/día, o la terapéutica estándar (vancomicina 1g cada 12h o una penicilina antiestafilocócica 2g cada 4h, ambos con gentamicina 1mg/kg cada 8h, durante los 4 primeros días). La variable principal fue el éxito en la población modificada por intención de tratamiento 6 semanas después del final del tratamiento.Resultados El estudio incluyó a 53 pacientes: 35 con endocarditis infecciosa de las cavidades derechas (RIE) y 18 con endocarditis infecciosa de las cavidades izquierdas (LIE). En los pacientes con RIE, las tasas de éxito con daptomicina y el tratamiento de comparación fueron similares (42% frente a 44%). Los pacientes con RIE e infartos pulmonares sépticos respondieron de forma similar al tratamiento con daptomicina y con la terapéutica estándar (60% frente a 67%). En la población con LIE, las tasas de éxito fueron pobres con ambos brazos (11% frente a 22%).Conclusión Daptomicina es una alternativa eficaz y bien tolerada a la terapéutica estándar en el tratamiento de la RIE. Los pacientes con LIE tuvieron mal resultado, con independencia del tratamiento recibido. Daptomicina también es eficaz en el tratamiento de la endocarditis con infartos pulmonares sépticos (AU)