Short-course antibiotic regimen compared to conventional antibiotic treatment for gram-positive cocci infective endocarditis: randomized clinical trial (SATIE).

BACKGROUND: Most serious complications of infective endocarditis (IE) appear in the so-called "critical phase" of the disease, which represents the first days after diagnosis. The majority of patients overcoming the acute phase has a favorable outcome, yet they remain hospitalized for a long period of time mainly to complete antibiotic therapy. The major hypothesis of this trial is that in patients with clinically stable IE and adequate response to antibiotic treatment, without signs of persistent infection, periannular complications or metastatic foci, a shorter antibiotic time period would be as efficient and safe as the classic 4 to 6 weeks antibiotic regimen. METHODS: Multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled open-label, phase IV clinical trial with a non-inferiority design to evaluate the efficacy of a short course (2 weeks) of parenteral antibiotic therapy compared with conventional antibiotic therapy (4-6 weeks). SAMPLE: patients with IE caused by gram-positive cocci, having received at least 10 days of conventional antibiotic treatment, and at least 7 days after surgery when indicated, without clinical, analytical, microbiological or echocardiographic signs of persistent infection. Estimated sample size: 298 patients. INTERVENTION: Control group: standard duration antibiotic therapy, (4 to 6 weeks) according to ESC guidelines recommendations. Experimental group: short-course antibiotic therapy for 2 weeks. The incidence of the primary composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, unplanned cardiac surgery, symptomatic embolisms and relapses within 6 months after the inclusion in the study will be prospectively registered and compared. CONCLUSIONS: SATIE will investigate whether a two weeks short-course of intravenous antibiotics in patients with IE caused by gram-positive cocci, without signs of persistent infection, is not inferior in safety and efficacy to conventional antibiotic treatment (4-6 weeks). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04222257 (January 7, 2020). EudraCT 2019-003358-10.

Impact of Valve Culture in the Prognosis of Active Left-sided Infective Endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: The culture of removed cardiac tissues during cardiac surgery of left-sided infective endocarditis (LSIE) helps to guide antibiotic treatment. Nevertheless, the prognostic information of a positive valve culture has never been explored. METHODS: Among 1078 cases of LSIE consecutively diagnosed in 3 tertiary centers, we selected patients with positive blood cultures who underwent surgery during the active period of infection and in whom surgical biological tissues were cultured (n = 429). According to microbiological results, we constructed 2 groups: negative valve culture (n=218) and concordant positive valve culture (CPVC) (n=118). We compared their main features and performed a multivariable analysis of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Patients with CPVC presented more nosocomial origin (32% vs 20%, P = .014), more septic shock (21% vs 11%, P = .007), and higher Risk-E score (29% vs 21%, P = .023). Their in-hospital mortality was higher (35% vs 19%, P = .001), despite an earlier surgery (3 vs 11 days from antibiotic initiation, P < .001). Staphylococcus species (61% vs 42%, P = .001) and Enterococcus species (20% vs 9%, P = .002) were more frequent in the CPVC group, whereas Streptococcus species were less frequent (14% vs 42%, P < .001). Independent predictors for in-hospital mortality were renal failure (odds ratio [OR], 2.6 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.5-4.4]), prosthesis (OR, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.1-3.5]), Staphylococcus aureus (OR, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.02-3.3]), and CPVC (OR, 2.3 [95% CI, 1.4-3.9]). CONCLUSIONS: Valve culture in patients with active LSIE is an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality.

Streptococcus bovis endocarditis: Update from a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) due to Streptococcus bovis has been classically associated with elderly patients, frequently involving >1 valve, with large vegetations and high embolic risk, which make it a high-risk group. Our aim is to analyze the current clinical profile and prognosis of S bovis IE episodes, in comparison to those episodes caused by viridans group streptococci and enterococci. METHODS: We analyzed 1242 consecutive episodes of IE prospectively recruited on an ongoing multipurpose database, of which 294 were streptococcal left-sided IE and comprised our study group. They were classified into 3 groups: group I (n = 47), episodes of IE due to S bovis; group II (n = 134), episodes due to viridans group streptococci; and group III (n = 113), those episodes due to enterococci. RESULTS: The incidence of enterococci IE has significantly increased in the last 2 decades (6.4% [1996-2004] vs 11.1% [2005-2013]; P = .005), whereas the incidence of IE due to S bovis and viridans streptococci have remained stable (4% and 10%, respectively). Gender distribution was similar in the 3 groups. Patients with S bovis and enterococci IE were older than those from group II. Nosocomial acquisition was more frequent in group III. Concerning comorbidity, diabetes mellitus (36.7% vs 9.2% vs 26.8%; P < .001) was more common in groups I and III. Chronic renal failure was more prevalent in patients from group III (4.2% vs 1.5% vs 19%; P < .001). Prosthetic valve IE was more frequent in enterococcal IE. Infection upon normal native valves was more frequent in S bovis IE. Colorectal tumors were found in 69% of patients from this group. Vegetation detection was similar in the 3 groups. However, vegetation size was smaller in S bovis IE. During hospitalization, in-hospital complications and in-hospital mortality were higher in enterococci episodes. CONCLUSIONS: S bovis IE accounts for 3.8% of all IE episodes in our cohort; it is associated with a high prevalence of colonic tumors, with predominance of benign lesions, and affects patients without preexisting valve disease. It is related to small vegetations and a low rate of in-hospital complications, including systemic embolisms. In-hospital mortality is similar to that of viridans group streptococci.

Measurement of vegetations in infective endocarditis: An inaccurate method to decide the therapeutical approach.

BACKGROUND: The European Society of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines give a central role to the maximal vegetation diameter in the indication for surgery to prevent embolism in left sided infective endocarditis. Vegetation measuring is likely to be inaccurate. The hypothesis herein, is that the vegetation diameter is not an appropriate surgical criterion given the variability of its measurement. METHODS: Two trained echocardiographers independently measured the maximal vegetation diameter by transesophageal echocardiogram of 76 vegetations in 67 consecutive patients with definite infective endocarditis in an off-line workstation. The interobserver variability was calculated by the interclass correlation coefficient. The relationship between the strength of agreement for the cut-off points of 10 and 15 mm was also calculated. Finally, the number of patients whose surgical indication would have changed depending on which operator measured the vegetation was evaluated. RESULTS: Interobserver interclass correlation coefficient in the measurement of the maximal longitudinal diameter of the vegetations was 0.757 (0.642-0.839). The strength of agreement of the interobserver analysis for the cut-off point of 10 mm was 0.533 (0.327-0.759). For the cut-off point of 15 mm it was 0.475 (0.270-0.679). If heart failure or uncontrolled infections had been absent, the surgical indication would have changed in a total of 33 patients (33/76; 43%) depending on which operator measured the vegetation. CONCLUSIONS: The variability in the measurements of the maximal longitudinal diameter by transesophageal echocardiogram is high. Surgical indications based on the cut-off points recommended by the international guidelines should be revised.

Late gadolinium enhancement distribution patterns in non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy: genotype-phenotype correlation.

AIMS: Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) is frequently found in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM); there is little information about its frequency and distribution pattern according to the underlying genetic substrate. We sought to describe LGE patterns according to genotypes and to analyse the risk of major ventricular arrhythmias (MVA) according to patterns. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cardiac magnetic resonance findings and LGE distribution according to genetics were performed in a cohort of 600 DCM patients followed at 20 Spanish centres. After exclusion of individuals with multiple causative gene variants or with variants in infrequent DCM-causing genes, 577 patients (34% females, mean age 53.5 years, left ventricular ejection fraction 36.9 ± 13.9%) conformed to the final cohort. A causative genetic variant was identified in 219 (38%) patients, and 147 (25.5%) had LGE. Significant differences were found comparing LGE patterns between genes (P < 0.001). LGE was absent or rare in patients with variants in TNNT2, RBM20, and MYH7 (0, 5, and 20%, respectively). Patients with variants in DMD, DSP, and FLNC showed a predominance of LGE subepicardial patterns (50, 41, and 18%, respectively), whereas patients with variants in TTN, BAG3, LMNA, and MYBPC3 showed unspecific LGE patterns. The genetic yield differed according to LGE patterns. Patients with subepicardial, lineal midwall, transmural, and right ventricular insertion points or with combinations of LGE patterns showed an increased risk of MVA compared with patients without LGE. CONCLUSION: LGE patterns in DCM have a specific distribution according to the affected gene. Certain LGE patterns are associated with an increased risk of MVA and with an increased yield of genetic testing.

Reassessment of Vegetation Size as a Sole Indication for Surgery in Left-Sided Infective Endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend surgery for left-sided infective endocarditis (LSIE) that is associated with large vegetations. Given that most patients who undergo surgery also have other indications (heart failure and/or uncontrolled infection), it is not settled whether surgery should be routinely recommended in patients with large vegetations but no other predictors of poor outcome. METHODS: A total of 726 patients with definitive LSIE were included in our analysis. The mean age was 64.9 years, and 61% were male. Multivariate analysis of all patients was performed to determine whether vegetation size is related to death in LSIE. Then patients were divided into two groups according to vegetation size: group A (>10 mm, n = 420) and group B (≤10 mm, n = 306). Univariate and multivariate analyses of group A patients were carried out to identify the variables related to death in this group. The impact of surgery on mortality in group A patients without heart failure or uncontrolled local infection (n = 139) was assessed. RESULTS: Age, Staphylococcus aureus, perivalvular complications, heart failure, kidney failure, and septic shock, but not vegetation size, were associated with death. Patients with large vegetations showed increased mortality (31.7% in group A vs 24.8% in group B; P = .045). Group A had more valve rupture and valve regurgitation than group B, but heart failure (55% vs 53%; P = .678), stroke (22% vs 17.0%, P = .091), systemic embolism (39% vs 32%; P = .074), perivalvular complication (28% vs 28%; P = .865), and septic shock (15% vs 13%; P = .288) were similar in both groups. In patients from group A without heart failure or uncontrolled infection, mortality was similar with and without surgery (n = 139; n = 70 with surgery and n = 69 without surgery; mortality, 18.6% vs 11.6%, respectively; P = .251). CONCLUSIONS: Large vegetations identify patients with poor outcomes in the context of LSIE. However, surgery is not associated with a better prognosis in patients with large vegetations if they do not present with another predictor of poor outcome such as heart failure or uncontrolled infection. These findings challenge whether vegetation size alone should be an indication for surgery in LSIE.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis.

Background: Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial. Methods: We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings. Results: Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (-0.151 [95% CI -0.218, -0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (-0.167 [95% CI -0.220, -0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [-0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224-0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42-0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19. Conclusion: Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes.

Introducción: La hipertensión es una condición prevalente entre los pacientes infectados por el SARS-CoV-2. Es controvertido si los inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona (SRAA) son beneficiosos o perjudiciales. Métodos: Hemos desarrollado un estudio comparativo nacional retrospectivo y no experimental en 2 hospitales terciarios para evaluar el impacto del uso crónico de inhibidores del SRAA en pacientes hipertensos con COVID-19. Se realizó un metaanálisis para reforzar los hallazgos. Resultados: De 849 pacientes, 422 (49,7%) eran hipertensos y 310 (73,5%) tomaban inhibidores del SRAA al inicio del estudio. Los pacientes hipertensos eran mayores, tenían más comorbilidades y una mayor incidencia de insuficiencia respiratoria (−0,151; IC 95%: [−0,218; −0,084]). La mortalidad global en los pacientes hipertensos fue del 28,4%, pero fue menor entre los que tenían prescritos inhibidores del SRAA antes (−0,167; IC 95%: [−0,220; −0,114]) y durante la hospitalización (0,090; [−0,008; 0,188]). Se observaron hallazgos similares tras 2 emparejamientos de puntuación de propensión que evaluaron el beneficio de los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina y los bloqueadores de los receptores de angiotensina entre los pacientes hipertensos. El análisis de regresión logística multivariante de los pacientes hipertensos reveló que la edad, la diabetes mellitus, la proteína C reactiva y la insuficiencia renal se asociaban de forma independiente con la mortalidad por todas las causas. Por el contrario, los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina disminuyeron el riesgo de muerte (OR 0,444; IC 95%: 0,224-0,881). El metaanálisis indicó un beneficio protector de los inhibidores del SRAA (OR 0,6; IC 95%: 0,42-0,8) entre los hipertensos con COVID-19. Conclusión: Nuestros datos indican que los inhibidores del SRAA pueden desempeñar un papel protector en los pacientes hipertensos con COVID-19. Este hallazgo fue apoyado por un metaanálisis de la evidencia actual. Su mantenimiento durante la estancia hospitalaria puede no afectar negativamente a los resultados de la COVID-19.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial. METHODS: We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings. RESULTS: Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (-0.151 [95% CI -0.218, -0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (-0.167 [95% CI -0.220, -0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [-0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224-0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42-0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes.

Natural History of MYH7-Related Dilated Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Variants in myosin heavy chain 7 (MYH7) are responsible for disease in 1% to 5% of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM); however, the clinical characteristics and natural history of MYH7-related DCM are poorly described. OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the phenotype and prognosis of MYH7-related DCM. We also evaluated the influence of variant location on phenotypic expression. METHODS: We studied clinical data from 147 individuals with DCM-causing MYH7 variants (47.6% female; 35.6 ± 19.2 years) recruited from 29 international centers. RESULTS: At initial evaluation, 106 (72.1%) patients had DCM (left ventricular ejection fraction: 34.5% ± 11.7%). Median follow-up was 4.5 years (IQR: 1.7-8.0 years), and 23.7% of carriers who were initially phenotype-negative developed DCM. Phenotypic expression by 40 and 60 years was 46% and 88%, respectively, with 18 patients (16%) first diagnosed at <18 years of age. Thirty-six percent of patients with DCM met imaging criteria for LV noncompaction. During follow-up, 28% showed left ventricular reverse remodeling. Incidence of adverse cardiac events among patients with DCM at 5 years was 11.6%, with 5 (4.6%) deaths caused by end-stage heart failure (ESHF) and 5 patients (4.6%) requiring heart transplantation. The major ventricular arrhythmia rate was low (1.0% and 2.1% at 5 years in patients with DCM and in those with LVEF of ≤35%, respectively). ESHF and major ventricular arrhythmia were significantly lower compared with LMNA-related DCM and similar to DCM caused by TTN truncating variants. CONCLUSIONS: MYH7-related DCM is characterized by early age of onset, high phenotypic expression, low left ventricular reverse remodeling, and frequent progression to ESHF. Heart failure complications predominate over ventricular arrhythmias, which are rare.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: the SARS-CoV-2 infection ranges from asymptomatic to critical forms and several prognostic factors have been described. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations where it is linked with more complications and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic information of AF in this population. METHODS: retrospective analysis of a cohort of 517 patients consecutively admitted in a tertiary hospital due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We divided the patients in two groups according the development of AF and compared the main features of both groups. An univariable and multivariable analysis of mortality were also performed. RESULTS: among 517 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted in a tertiary center, 54 (10.4%) developed AF. These patients are older (81.6 vs 66.5 years old, p<0.001) and present more hypertension (74% vs 47%, p<0.001), cardiomyopathy (9% vs 1%, p=0.002), previous heart failure admission (9% vs 0.4%, p<0.001), previous episodes of AF (83% vs 1%, p<0.001) and bigger left atrium (47.8 vs 39.9mm, p<0.001). AF COVID-19 patients present more acute respiratory failure (72% vs 40%, p<0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality (50% vs 22%, p<0.001). Predictors of AF development are age and previous AF. AF is not an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality. Predictors are age, creatinine>1.5mg/dL at admission, LDH>250UI/L at admission and acute respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: Atrial fibrillation appears in 10% of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients present more comorbidities and two-fold increase in hospital mortality. Atrial fibrillation is not an independent prognostic factor.

Infective endocarditis in patients with aortic grafts.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) in patients with a valve-tube ascending aortic graft (AAG) is a rare entity with a challenging diagnosis and treatment. This study describes the clinical features, diagnosis and outcome of these patients. METHODS: Between 1996 and 2019, 1654 episodes of IE were recruited in 3 centres, of which 37 patients (2.2%) had prosthetic aortic valve and AAG-IE (21 composite valve graft, 16 supracoronary graft) and conformed our study group. RESULTS: Patients with aortic grafts were predominantly male (91.9%) and the mean age was 67.7 years. Staphylococci were the most frequently isolated microorganisms (32%). Viridans group streptococci were only isolated in patients with composite valve graft. TEE was positive in 89.2%. PET/CT was positive in all 15 patients in whom it was performed. Surgical treatment was performed in 62.2% of patients. In-hospital mortality was 16.2%. Heart failure and the type of infected graft (supracoronary aortic graft) were associated with mortality. Mortality among operated patients was 21.7%. Interestingly, 14 patients received antibiotic therapy alone, and only one died. Mortality was lower among patients with a composite valve graft compared to those with a supracoronary graft (4.8% vs 31.3%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AAG and prosthetic aortic valve IE, mortality is not higher than in other patients with prosthetic IE. Multimodality imaging plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of these patients. Heart failure and the type of surgery were risk factors associated with in-hospital mortality. Although surgical treatment is usually recommended, a conservative management might be a valid alternative treatment in selected patients.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: the SARS-CoV-2 infection ranges from asymptomatic to critical forms and several prognostic factors have been described. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations where it is linked with more complications and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic information of AF in this population. METHODS: retrospective analysis of a cohort of 517 patients consecutively admitted in a tertiary hospital due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We divided the patients in two groups according the development of AF and compared the main features of both groups. An univariable and multivariable analysis of mortality were also performed. RESULTS: among 517 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted in a tertiary center, 54 (10.4%) developed AF. These patients are older (81.6 vs 66.5 years old, p < 0.001) and present more hypertension (74% vs 47%, p < 0.001), cardiomyopathy (9% vs 1%, p = 0.002), previous heart failure admission (9% vs 0.4%, p < 0.001), previous episodes of AF (83% vs 1%, p < 0.001) and bigger left atrium (47.8 vs 39.9 mm, p < 0.001). AF COVID-19 patients present more acute respiratory failure (72% vs 40%, p < 0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality (50% vs 22%, p < 0.001). Predictors of AF development are age and previous AF. AF is not an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality. Predictors are age, creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL at admission, LDH > 250 UI/L at admission and acute respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: Atrial fibrillation appears in 10% of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients present more comorbidities and two-fold increase in hospital mortality. Atrial fibrillation is not an independent prognostic factor.

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVO: La infección por SARS-CoV-2 presenta un amplio espectro clínico, y varios factores pronósticos han sido descritos. La fibrilación auricular (FA) es frecuente en situaciones agudas, donde se ha relacionado con aumento de complicaciones y mortalidad. Nuestro objetivo ha sido evaluar el impacto pronóstico de la FA en esta población. MÉTODOS: Análisis retrospectivo de una cohorte de 517 pacientes con infección SARS-CoV-2 consecutivamente ingresados en un hospital terciario. Dividimos a los pacientes en dos grupos de acuerdo al desarrollo de FA durante el ingreso y comparamos las características de los grupos. Realizamos análisis univariado y multivariado de mortalidad. RESULTADOS: De los 517 pacientes, 54 (10,4%) desarrollaron FA. Estos pacientes son mayores (81,6 vs. 66,5 años, p < 0,001) y presentan más hipertensión (74% vs. 47%, p < 0,001), miocardiopatía (9% vs. 1%, p = 0,002), ingreso previo por insuficiencia cardiaca (9% vs. 0,4%, p < 0,001), historia de FA (83% vs. 1%, p < 0,001) y mayor aurícula izquierda (47,8 vs. 39,9 mm, p < 0,001). Los pacientes con FA presentan más fallo respiratorio agudo (72% vs. 40%, p < 0,001) y mayor mortalidad hospitalaria (50% vs. 22%, p < 0,001). Los predictores de FA son la edad y la historia de FA previa. La FA no es un predictor independiente de mortalidad hospitalaria. Los predictores son: edad, creatinina > 1,5 mg/dL al ingreso, LDH > 250 U/L al ingreso y el fallo respiratorio agudo. CONCLUSIÓN: La FA aparece en el 10% de los pacientes hospitalizados por SARS-CoV-2. Estos presentan mayor comorbilidad y el doble de mortalidad hospitalaria, pero la FA no es un factor pronóstico independiente.

Impact of the presence of heart disease, cardiovascular medications and cardiac events on outcome in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular risk factors and usage of cardiovascular medication are prevalent among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Little is known about the cardiovascular implications of COVID-19. The goal herein, was to evaluate the prognostic impact of having heart disease (HD) and taking cardiovascular medications in a population diagnosed of COVID-19 who required hospitalization. Also, we studied the development of cardiovascular events during hospitalization. METHODS: Consecutive patients with definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 made by a positive real time- -polymerase chain reaction of nasopharyngeal swabs who were admitted to the hospital from March 15 to April 14 were included in a retrospective registry. The association of HD with mortality and with mortality or respiratory failure were the primary and secondary objectives, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 859 patients were included in the present analysis. Cardiovascular risk factors were related to death, particularly diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio in the multivariate analysis: 1.810 [1.159- -2.827], p = 0.009). A total of 113 (13.1%) patients had HD. The presence of HD identified a group of patients with higher mortality (35.4% vs. 18.2%, p < 0.001) but HD was not independently related to prognosis; renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, diuretics and beta-blockers did not worsen prognosis. Statins were independently associated with decreased mortality (0.551 [0.329-0.921], p = 0.023). Cardiovascular events during hospitalization identified a group of patients with poor outcome (mortality 31.8% vs. 19.3% without cardiovascular events, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of HD is related to higher mortality. Cardiovascular medications taken before admission are not harmful, statins being protective. The development of cardiovascular events during the course of the disease is related to poor outcome.

Prognostic impact of cardiac surgery in left-sided infective endocarditis according to risk profile.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic impact of urgent cardiac surgery on the prognosis of left-sided infective endocarditis (LSIE) and its relationship to the basal risk of the patient and to the surgical indication. METHODS: 605 patients with LSIE and formal surgical indication were consecutively recruited between 2000 and 2020 among three tertiary centres: 405 underwent surgery during the active phase of the disease and 200 did not despite having indication. The prognostic impact of urgent surgery was evaluated by multivariable analysis and propensity score analysis. We studied the benefit of surgery according to baseline mortality risk defined by the ENDOVAL score and according to surgical indication. RESULTS: Surgery is an independent predictor of survival in LSIE with surgical indication both by multivariable analysis (OR 0.260, 95% CI 0.162 to 0.416) and propensity score (mortality 40% vs 66%, p<0.001). Its greatest prognostic benefit is seen in patients at highest risk (predicted mortality 80%-100%: OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.021 to 0.299). The benefit of surgery is especially remarkable for uncontrolled infection indication (OR 0.385, 95% CI 0.194 to 0.765), even in combination with heart failure (OR 0.220, 95% CI 0.077 to 0.632). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery during active LSIE seems to significantly reduce in-hospital mortality. The higher the risk, the higher the improvement in outcome.

Predictive model of in-hospital mortality in left-sided infective endocarditis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a complex disease with high in-hospital mortality. Prognostic assessment is essential to select the most appropriate therapeutic approach; however, international IE guidelines do not provide objective assessment of the individual risk in each patient. We aimed to design a predictive model of in-hospital mortality in left-sided IE combining the prognostic variables proposed by the European guidelines. METHODS: Two prospective cohorts of consecutive patients with left-sided IE were used. Cohort 1 (n=1002) was randomized in a 2:1 ratio to obtain 2 samples: an adjustment sample to derive the model (n=688), and a validation sample for internal validation (n=314). Cohort 2 (n=133) was used for external validation. RESULTS: The model included age, prosthetic valve IE, comorbidities, heart failure, renal failure, septic shock, Staphylococcus aureus, fungi, periannular complications, ventricular dysfunction, and vegetations as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. The model showed good discrimination (area under the ROC curve=0.855; 95%CI, 0.825-0.885) and calibration (P value in Hosmer-Lemeshow test=0.409), which were ratified in the internal (area under the ROC curve=0.823; 95%CI, 0.774-0.873) and external validations (area under the ROC curve=0.753; 95%CI, 0.659-0.847). For the internal validation sample (observed mortality: 29.9%) the model predicted an in-hospital mortality of 30.7% (95%CI, 27.7-33.7), and for the external validation cohort (observed mortality: 27.1%) the value was 26.4% (95%CI, 22.2-30.5). CONCLUSIONS: A predictive model of in-hospital mortality in left-sided IE based on the prognostic variables proposed by the European Society of Cardiology IE guidelines has high discriminatory ability.

Contemporary epidemiology and outcomes in recurrent infective endocarditis.

OBJECTIVE: Recurrent infective endocarditis (IE) is a major complication of patients surviving a first episode of IE. This study sought to analyse the current state of recurrent IE in a large contemporary cohort. METHODS: 1335 consecutive episodes of IE were recruited prospectively in three tertiary care centres in Spain between 1996 and 2015. Episodes were categorised into group I (n=1227), first-IE episode and group II (n=108), recurrent IE (8.1%). After excluding six patients, due to lack of relevant data, group II was subdivided into IIa (n=87), reinfection (different microorganism), and IIb (n=15), relapse (same microorganism within 6 months of the initial episode). RESULTS: The cumulative burden and incidence of recurrence was slightly lower in the second decade of the study (2006-2015) (7.17 vs 4.10 events/100 survivors and 7.51% vs 3.82, respectively). Patients with reinfections, compared with group I, were significantly younger, had a higher frequency of HIV infection, were more commonly intravenous drug users (IVDU) and prosthetic valve carriers, had less embolic complications and cardiac surgery, with similar in-hospital mortality. IVDU was found to be an independent predictor of reinfection (HR 3.92, 95% CI 1.86 to 8.28).In the relapse IE group, prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) and periannular complications were more common. Among patients treated medically, those with PVE had a higher relapse incidence (4.82% vs 0.43% in native valve IE, p=0.018). Staphylococcus aureus and PVE were independent predictors of relapse (HR 3.14, 95% CI 1.11 to 8.86 and 3.19, 95% CI 1.13 to 9.00, respectively) and in-hospital-mortality was similar to group I. Three-year all-cause mortality was similar in recurrent episodes compared with single episodes. CONCLUSION: Recurrent IE remains a frequent late complication. IVDU was associated with a fourfold increase in the risk of reinfection. PVE treated medically and infections caused by S. aureus increased the risk of relapse. In-hospital and long-term mortality was comparable among groups.