Nondental Invasive Procedures and Risk of Infective Endocarditis: Time for a Revisit: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association.

There have been no published prospective randomized clinical trials that have: (1) established an association between invasive dental and nondental invasive procedures and risk of infective endocarditis; or (2) defined the efficacy and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis administered in the setting of invasive procedures in the prevention of infective endocarditis in high-risk patients. Moreover, previous observational studies that examined the association of nondental invasive procedures with the risk of infective endocarditis have been limited by inadequate sample size. They have typically focused on a few potential at-risk surgical and nonsurgical invasive procedures. However, recent investigations from Sweden and England that used nationwide databases and demonstrated an association between nondental invasive procedures, and the subsequent development of infective endocarditis (in particular, in high-risk patients with infective endocarditis) prompted the development of the current science advisory.

Neutrophils Protect Against Staphylococcus aureus Endocarditis Progression Independent of Extracellular Trap Release.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) is characterized by an infected thrombus at the heart valves. How bacteria bypass the immune system and cause these thrombi remains unclear. Neutrophils releasing NETs (neutrophil extracellular traps) lie at this interface between host defense and coagulation. We aimed to determine the role of NETs in IE immunothrombosis. METHODS: We used a murine model of Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis in which IE is provoked on inflamed heart valves and characterized IE thrombus content by immunostaining identifying NETs. Antibody-mediated neutrophil depletion and neutrophil-selective PAD4 (peptidylarginine deiminase 4)-knockout mice were used to clarify the role of neutrophils and NETs, respectively. S. aureus mutants deficient in key virulence factors related to immunothrombosis (nucleases or staphylocoagulases) were investigated. RESULTS: Neutrophils releasing NETs were present in infected thrombi and within cellular infiltrates in the surrounding vasculature. Neutrophil depletion increased occurrence of IE, whereas neutrophil-selective impairment of NET formation did not alter IE occurrence. Absence of S. aureus nuclease, which degrades NETs, did not affect endocarditis outcome. In contrast, absence of staphylocoagulases (coagulase and von Willebrand factor binding protein) led to improved survival, decreased bacteremia, smaller infiltrates, and decreased tissue destruction. Significantly more NETs were present in these vegetations, which correlated with decreased bacteria and cell death in the adjacent vascular wall. CONCLUSIONS: Neutrophils protect against IE independent of NET release. Absence of S. aureus coagulases, but not nucleases, reduced IE severity and increased NET levels. Staphylocoagulase-induced fibrin likely hampers NETs from constraining infection and the resultant tissue damage, a hallmark of valve destruction in IE.

Antibacterial copper-filled TiO2 coating of cardiovascular implants to prevent infective endocarditis-A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) poses a significant health risk, especially in patients with prosthetic heart valves. Despite advances in treatment, mortality rates remain high. This study aims to investigate the antibacterial properties of a copper titanium dioxide (4× Cu-TiO2) coating on cardiovascular implants against Staphylococcus aureus, a common causative agent of IE. METHODS: Titanium oxide carriers functionalized with copper ions were employed as an antibacterial coating for heart and vascular prostheses. The coating's antibacterial efficacy was assessed using S. aureus ATCC 29213. Microscopic evaluations were conducted on both biological and artificial materials. Antibacterial activity was qualitatively assessed via a modified disc diffusion method and quantitatively measured through colony counts in NaCl suspensions. RESULTS: The coating process was successfully applied to all tested cardiovascular prosthetic materials. Qualitative assessments of antibacterial effectiveness revealed an absence of bacterial growth in the area directly beneath the coated valve. Quantitative evaluations showed a significant reduction in bacterial colonization on coated mechanical valves, with 2.95 × 104 CFU per valve, compared to 1.91 × 105 CFU in control valves. CONCLUSIONS: The 4× Cu-TiO2 coating demonstrated promising antibacterial properties against S. aureus, suggesting its potential as an effective strategy for reducing the risk of bacterial colonization of cardiovascular implants. Further studies are needed to assess the longevity of the coating and its efficacy against other pathogens.

[ESC guidelines 2023 on the management of endocarditis : What is new?] / ESC-Leitlinien 2023 zum Management der Endokarditis : Was ist neu?

In August 2023 the new European guidelines on the management of infective endocarditis were published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Numerous recommendations were revised and supplemented by new ones. This review article outlines the essential modifications of the current ESC guidelines focusing on the prevention including antibiotic prophylaxis, the role of the endocarditis team, the revision of the diagnostic criteria, the paradigm shift towards oral antibiotic treatment, the timing and the indications for surgical treatment as well as the relevance of infections of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices.

Infective Endocarditis: Etiology, Epidemiology and Current Recommendations for the Dental Practitioner.

Infective endocarditis (IE) remains one of the most serious diseases with a high morbidity and mortality rate. Although the condition is more common in the medical field in a hospital setting, dentists must have a thorough understanding of the overall pathogenesis, epidemiology, risk factors and signs and symptoms that may be present in their patient population. In 2021, the American Heart Association (AHA) updated its guidelines on IE, emphasizing the specific criteria that put a patient at risk of acquiring IE, specific dental procedures that can increase the risk of IE by inducing bacteremia and an antibiotic prophylaxis regimen to act as a preventive measure if needed. This literature review gives the dental practitioner a general overview of the AHA guidelines as well as information on prevention in their at-risk patients and the need to emphasize a well-structured, consistent daily oral hygiene routine.

Assessment of endocarditis prophylaxis knowledge and attitudes among healthcare practitioners in Tehran and Hamadan.

BACKGROUND: Having knowledge of the dental procedures that necessitate endocarditis prophylaxis is of high importance. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to determine the knowledge level and attitudes of general medical and dental practitioners, dental specialists, and cardiologists in Tehran and Hamadan about endocarditis. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was carried out on 420 general medical and dental practitioners, dental specialists, and cardiologists in Tehran and Hamadan provinces in 2015. The questionnaire used in this research consisted of three parts as follows: part one: information on cardiac diseases; part two: dental procedures requiring endocarditis prophylaxis; part three: antibiotic diet in endocarditis prophylaxis. Independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, and chi-square tests were conducted to analyze the data. All the analyses were performed in SPSS version 16. RESULTS: The results showed that 86.7 had a relatively favorable and 10.5% of subjects had a favorable level of knowledge about endocarditis. Also, 58.6% of subjects had a poor attitude toward endocarditis prophylaxis. There was a significant relationship between knowledge and attitude, age, gender, and work experience (P < 0.001). There was a significant relationship between knowledge and attitude, and job groups; dental specialists had a more favorable knowledge and positive attitude than others (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We recommended developing more practical training programs in dental schools on cardiac diseases, and dental procedures requiring endocarditis prophylaxis and antibiotic diets.

Assessment of the current knowledge about infective endocarditis prevention among dental hygienists in Italy: A national survey.

OBJECTIVES: To date, there is a lack of data regarding the acceptance of the guidelines for infective endocarditis (IE) prevention among dentists in Italy, and similarly, there are no data on the understanding and compliance of those among dental hygienists (DH). Thus, we tried to assess the ability of DH to recognize and manage categories of patients at high risk of EI, to identify which dental procedures are at increased risk and to assess the level of knowledge of doses and how antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered in specific cases. METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was prepared and made accessible online by sharing a Google Forms® link; general personal data and educational background information were collected to obtain a profile of the participants. RESULTS: A total of 362 DH answered to our web-based survey, showing a prevalent female percentage (86.7%) and the most represented age group of 30-39 years old (43.1%). Regarding the gender differences, there were not overall statistically significant differences; similarly, we did not find any differences regarding the overall number of wrong questions if considering the different ages of the participant and the year of graduation. Graduates in Northern Italy have mistaken fewer questions than graduates in other geographical areas. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest survey about the knowledge of IE for DH ever performed. Because the overprescription of antibiotics contributes to the development of drug resistance, antibiotic stewardship should be at the forefront of patient care. Our data reflect the need for placing a greater emphasis on IE prophylaxis education in training and during continuing professional development events for DH.

Antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedures to prevent infective endocarditis: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a severe bacterial infection. As a measure of prevention, the administration of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) prior to dental procedures was recommended in the past. However, between 2007 and 2009, guidelines for IE prophylaxis changed all around the word, limiting or supporting the complete cessation of AP. It remains unclear whether AP is effective or not against IE. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review whether the administration of AP in adults before any dental procedure, compared to the non-administration of such drugs, has an effect on the risk of developing IE. We searched for studies in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via OVID, and EMBASE. Two different authors filtered articles independently and data extraction was performed based on a pre-defined protocol. RESULTS: The only cohort study meeting our criteria included patients at high-risk of IE. Analysis of the extracted data showed a non-significant decrease in the risk of IE when high-risk patients take AP prior to invasive dental procedures (RR 0.39, p-value 0.11). We did not find other studies including patients at low or moderate risk of IE. Qualitative evaluation of the excluded articles reveals diversity of results and suggests that most of the state-of-the-art articles are underpowered. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence to support or discourage the use of AP prior to dental procedures as a prevention for IE is very low. New high-quality studies are needed, even though such studies would require big settings and might not be immediately feasible.

Infective Endocarditis Antibiotic Prophylaxis: Review of the Evidence and Guidelines.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The question of antibiotic prophylaxis and its role in prevention of infective endocarditis (IE) remains controversial, with differing recommendations from international societies. The aim of this review was to compare and contrast current recommendations on antibiotic prophylaxis for IE by the American Heart Association (AHA), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and highlight the evidence supporting these recommendations. RECENT FINDINGS: International guidelines for administration of antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of IE are largely unchanged since 2009. Studies on the impact of the more restrictive antibiotic prophylaxis recommendations are conflicting, with several studies suggesting lack of adherence to current guidance from the ESC (2015), NICE (2016), and AHA (2021). The question of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with IE remains controversial, with differing recommendations from international societies. Despite the change in guidelines more than 15 years ago, lack of adherence to current guidelines persists. Due to the lack of high-quality evidence and the conflicting results from observational studies along with the lack of randomized clinical trials, the question of whether to recommend antibiotic prophylaxis or not in certain patient populations remains unanswered and remains largely based on expert consensus opinion.

Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in skin surgery - Position paper of the Antibiotic Stewardship working group of the German Society for Dermatologic Surgery (DGDC), Part 2: Special indications and situations.

In addition to prevention of surgical site infections after skin surgery, perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) aims to prevent the occurrence of other postoperative infectious complications, especially bacterial endocarditis and hematogenous joint prosthesis infections. This article discusses specific indications for the use of PAP. For example, patients who have undergone any type of heart valve replacement, including transcatheter valve replacement or use of prosthetic material to correct the heart valve, or patients who have experienced bacterial endocarditis, require PAP during skin surgery on mucosal membranes or ulcerated tumors. The use of PAP in special situations such as secondary wound healing, septic dermatosurgery or ulcer surgery is also presented and discussed in detail in this paper based on the current scientific literature. This paper represents the second part of the position paper of the Antibiotic Stewardship Working Group of the German Society for Dermatologic Surgery (DGDC) and summarizes evidence-based recommendations for the administration of PAP during skin surgery for special indications and situations. This is particularly important because, as detailed in Part 1 of this position paper, PAP can and usually should be avoided in skin surgery.

Recent infective endocarditis research findings suggest dentists prescribe prophylactic antibiotics for patients having a bicuspid aortic valve or mitral valve prolapse.

BACKGROUND: The scientific validity of the European Society of Cardiology's (ESC) infective endocarditis (IE) guidelines limiting provision of prophylactic antibiotics (AP) only to patients having cardiac anomalies (e.g., prosthetic valves) believed to place them at "high risk" of adverse events when undergoing high risk dental procedures (HRDP) is unclear. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review of studies conducted between 2017 and 2022 and catalogued in the PubMed database was undertaken to ascertain if this edict was associated with changes in IE incidence, development of infection in unprotected cardiac anomalies, developing infection and resultant adverse clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Retrieved were 19 published manuscripts, however of these, 16 were excluded because they did not bare upon the issues of concern. Among the three studies eligible for review were those in the Netherlands, Spain, and England. The results of the Dutch study denoted a significant increase in the incidence of IE cases over the projected historical trend (rate ratio: 1327, 95% CI 1.205-1.462; p<0.001) after the introduction of the ESC guidelines. The findings from the Spanish study evidenced the uniquely high in-hospital IE associated fatality rates suffered by patients having bicuspid aortic valves (BAV); 5.6% or mitral valve prolapse (MVP); 10%. The British study provided evidence that the incidence of fatal IE infection was significantly greater among an "intermediate risk" cohort of patients, (a group likely including those with BAC and MVP for which the ESC guidelines don't recommend AP), than among "high risk" patients (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Patients having either a BAV or MVP are at significant risk of developing IE and suffering serious sequelae including death. The ESC guidelines must reclassify these specific cardiac anomalies into the "high risk" category so that AP are recognized as being needed prior to provision of HRDP.

Infective Endocarditis Among High-risk Individuals Before and After the Cessation of Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Dentistry: A National Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: A few years after the publication of the British guidelines, national recommendations were published by the Swedish Medical Products Agency in October 2012, promoting the cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis in dentistry for the prevention of infective endocarditis (IE). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the incidence of oral streptococcal IE increased among high-risk individuals after October 2012. METHODS: This nationwide cohort study included all adult individuals (>17 years) living in Sweden from January 2008 to January 2018, with a diagnose code or surgical procedure code indicating high risk of IE. Cox proportional hazard models were performed to calculate adjusted ratios of oral streptococcal IE before and after October 2012 between high-risk individuals and references. RESULTS: This study found no increased incidence of oral streptococcal IE among high-risk individuals during the 5 years after the cessation, compared with before. Hazard rate ratios were 15.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.3-28.5) before and 20.7 (95% CI: 10.0-42.7) after October 2012 for prevalent high-risk individuals. Corresponding ratios for incident high-risk individuals were 66.8 (95% CI: 28.7-155.6) and 44.6 (95% CI: 22.9-86.9). Point estimates for interaction with time period were 1.4 (95% CI: .6-3.5) and 0.8 (95% CI: .5-1.3) for prevalent and incident high-risk individuals, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the current Swedish recommendation not to administer antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of IE in dentistry has not led to an increased incidence of oral streptococcal IE among high-risk individuals.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing bacterial endocarditis following dental procedures.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis is a severe infection arising in the lining of the chambers of the heart. It can be caused by fungi, but most often is caused by bacteria. Many dental procedures cause bacteraemia, which could lead to bacterial endocarditis in a small proportion of people. The incidence of bacterial endocarditis is low, but it has a high mortality rate.  Guidelines in many countries have recommended that antibiotics be administered to people at high risk of endocarditis prior to invasive dental procedures. However, guidance by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England and Wales states that antibiotic prophylaxis against infective endocarditis is not recommended routinely for people undergoing dental procedures. This is an update of a review that we first conducted in 2004 and last updated in 2013. OBJECTIVES: Primary objective To determine whether prophylactic antibiotic administration, compared to no antibiotic administration or placebo, before invasive dental procedures in people at risk or at high risk of bacterial endocarditis, influences mortality, serious illness or the incidence of endocarditis. Secondary objectives To determine whether the effect of dental antibiotic prophylaxis differs in people with different cardiac conditions predisposing them to increased risk of endocarditis, and in people undergoing different high risk dental procedures. Harms Had we foundno evidence from randomised controlled trials or cohort studies on whether prophylactic antibiotics affected mortality or serious illness, and we had found evidence from these or case-control studies suggesting that prophylaxis with antibiotics reduced the incidence of endocarditis, then we would also have assessed whether the harms of prophylaxis with single antibiotic doses, such as with penicillin (amoxicillin 2 g or 3 g) before invasive dental procedures, compared with no antibiotic or placebo, equalled the benefits in prevention of endocarditis in people at high risk of this disease. SEARCH METHODS: An information specialist searched four bibliographic databases up to 10 May 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies SELECTION CRITERIA: Due to the low incidence of bacterial endocarditis, we anticipated that few if any trials would be located. For this reason, we included cohort and case-control studies with suitably matched control or comparison groups. The intervention was antibiotic prophylaxis, compared to no antibiotic prophylaxis or placebo, before a dental procedure in people with an increased risk of bacterial endocarditis. Cohort studies would need to follow at-risk individuals and assess outcomes following any invasive dental procedures, grouping participants according to whether or not they had received prophylaxis. Case-control studies would need to match people who had developed endocarditis after undergoing an invasive dental procedure (and who were known to be at increased risk before undergoing the procedure) with those at similar risk who had not developed endocarditis.  Our outcomes of interest were mortality or serious adverse events requiring hospital admission; development of endocarditis following any dental procedure in a defined time period; development of endocarditis due to other non-dental causes; any recorded adverse effects of the antibiotics; and the cost of antibiotic provision compared to that of caring for patients who developed endocarditis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened search records, selected studies for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in the included study and extracted data from the included study. As an author team, we judged the certainty of the evidence identified for the main comparison and key outcomes using GRADE criteria. We presented the main results in a summary of findings table. MAIN RESULTS: Our new search did not find any new studies for inclusion since the last version of the review in 2013. No randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs) or cohort studies were included in the previous versions of the review, but one case-control study met the inclusion criteria. The trial authors collected information on 48 people who had contracted bacterial endocarditis over a specific two-year period and had undergone a medical or dental procedure with an indication for prophylaxis within the past 180 days. These people were matched to a similar group of people who had not contracted bacterial endocarditis. All study participants had undergone an invasive medical or dental procedure. The two groups were compared to establish whether those who had received preventive antibiotics (penicillin) were less likely to have developed endocarditis. The authors found no significant effect of penicillin prophylaxis on the incidence of endocarditis. No data on other outcomes were reported. The level of certainty we have about the evidence is very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There remains no clear evidence about whether antibiotic prophylaxis is effective or ineffective against bacterial endocarditis in at-risk people who are about to undergo an invasive dental procedure. We cannot determine whether the potential harms and costs of antibiotic administration outweigh any beneficial effect. Ethically, practitioners should discuss the potential benefits and harms of antibiotic prophylaxis with their patients before a decision is made about administration.

Prevention of Infective Endocarditis of Oral Origin in Children: A Call for Pediatric Dentists-Pediatric Cardiologists' Collaboration in Egypt.

AIM: To assess knowledge and practices of some Egyptian pediatric dentists and pediatric cardiologists/cardiac surgeons regarding prevention of infective endocarditis (IE) from oral origin in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pediatric dentists or pediatric cardiologists/cardiac surgeons having their practice in Egypt were conveniently selected. An online questionnaire was constructed for each specialty practitioner in English using a web-based platform. Each survey tool collected data about demographics, knowledge, and practices concerning the prevention of IE of oral origin. Surveys were disseminated to potential respondents using direct messaging or posting surveys' links on high-traffic areas (blogs, groups, or pages) of commonly known social media platforms. RESULTS: Two-hundred and thirty-nine pediatric dentists and 71 pediatric cardiologists/cardiac surgeons' responses were included in analysis. Some shortage in oral health knowledge and deviations in management protocol from known guidelines were evident in cardiologists' responses, whereas 66.2 and 64.8% reported encountering IE of oral origin or canceling a cardiac surgery due to oral infection, respectively. Most pediatric dentists (65.7%) rely on physician referral before managing children at risk of IE despite following recognized guidelines for IE prevention which may reflect difficulty in understanding such guidelines. Ninety percent of children with heart diseases visit a dentist due to oral complaint and not for checkup. CONCLUSION: Identification of disparities and pitfalls in management of children with heart diseases, if appropriately addressed by pediatric dentists and cardiologists, may reduce the risk of IE from an oral origin. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Health education of both specialists and development of national guidelines based on national epidemiology and clinical experience of cardiologists are strongly needed to decrease oral disease burden, allow for a consensus of patient management, and minimize the need for cross-referral, thus facilitating dental management without undue delays.

Not Just Endocarditis: Hospitalizations for Selected Invasive Infections Among Persons With Opioid and Stimulant Use Diagnoses-North Carolina, 2010-2018.

BACKGROUND: While increases in overdoses, viral hepatitis, and endocarditis associated with drug use have been well-documented in North Carolina, the full scope of invasive drug-related infections (IDRIs) has not. We characterized trends in IDRIs among hospitalized patients in North Carolina. METHODS: We compared invasive infections that were related or not related to drug use among hospitalized patients aged 18-55 years based on retrospective review of administrative records from 2010-2018. Hospitalizations for endocarditis, central nervous system/spine infections, osteomyelitis, and septic arthritis were labeled as IDRIs if discharge codes included opioid and/or amphetamine misuse. Trends, rates, and distributions were calculated. RESULTS: Among 44 851 hospitalizations for the specified infections, 2830 (6.3%) were IDRIs. The proportion of infections attributable to drug use increased from 1.5% (2010) to 13.1% (2018), and the rate grew from 1.2 to 15.1 per 100 000. Compared with those who had non-drug-related infections, patients with IDRIs were younger (median age, 35 vs 46 years), more likely to be non-Hispanic white (81% vs 56%), and had longer hospitalizations (median, 8 vs 6 days). 43% of hospitalizations for IDRIs involved infective endocarditis. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of IDRIs in North Carolina increased substantially during 2010-2018, indicating an urgent need for enhanced infection prevention, harm reduction, and addiction services aimed at community and inpatient settings.

[Prevention of endocarditis in dentistry]. / Profilaktyka infekcyjnego zapalenia wsierdzia w stomatologii.

Infective endocarditis (IE) is an inflammatory process caused by the implantation of bacteria on the heart valves or wall insertion. Bacteria leading to IE may be caused by oral procedures, such as tooth extractions, periodontal treatments, root canal treatment, scaling and tooth implantation. Antibiotic prophylaxis should only be used in accordance with the recommendations in the high-risk group of IEs, by providing the appropriate antibiotic 30-60 min. Before the planned dental treatment. In addition to appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis, special emphasis should be placed on improving dental care, regular check-ups and planned dental treatment as well as on maintaining proper oral hygiene.

[Antibiotic prophylaxis for infective endocarditis: current approaches].

This review addresses current views on prevention of infectious endocarditis (IE). History of establishing the concept of antibacterial prophylaxis (ABP), major approaches, and substantiation of changes in ABP in recent years are described. Recent international and national guidelines are highlighted, specifically, guidelines of the European Society of Cardiologists, American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology, and the Japanese Circulation Society. The review presents critical evaluation of previously approved international guidelines, including analysis of the effect of partial or complete ABP restriction on IE morbidity and incidence of complications. Special attention is paid to awareness of practitioners, particularly dentists, about ABP issues in their practice. Aspects of validity and key features of preventive approaches in implanting cardiac electronic devices and transcatheter aortic valve implantation are discussed.

Relationship between Vancomycin MIC and Virulence Gene Expression in Clonal Complexes of Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Strains Isolated from Left-Sided Endocarditis.

Higher vancomycin MICs have been associated with more complicated courses and higher mortality rates in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and infective endocarditis (IE). The aim of this study was to investigate whether the strains belonging to the cohort of 93 patients from a previously published study in which patients with strains with vancomycin MICs of ≥1.5 µg/ml presented higher mortality rates and systemic emboli than patients with strains with vancomycin MICs of <1.5 µg/ml had specific patterns of virulence factors, clonal complex (CC) types, or the ability to form biofilms. Vancomycin MICs were determined by Etest, and the isolates underwent spa typing to infer the CC, biofilm studies, a thrombin-induced platelet microbicidal assay, and multiplex PCR for the presence of virulence genes. We found no differences in genes encoding adhesins, toxins, or other putative virulence genes according to the vancomycin MIC group. CC30, CC34, and CC45 represented nearly half of the isolates, and there was no association with the vancomycin MIC. agr subgroups I and III predominated, with no association with the vancomycin MIC. Isolates with higher vancomycin MICs exhibited a poorer ability to form biofilms with and without the presence of vancomycin (2.03 versus 2.48 [P < 0.001], respectively, for isolates with higher vancomycin MICs and 2.60 versus 2.87 [P = 0.022], respectively, for isolates with lower vancomycin MICs). In the multivariable analysis, efb and V8 were risk factors for major emboli (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 7.5 and 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2 to 46.6 for efb, and aOR = 3.9 and 95% CI = 1.1 to 14.1 for V8), whereas no genotypic predictors of in-hospital mortality were found. No clear associations between genes encoding virulence factors, agr type, clonal complexes, mortality, and major embolic events according to vancomycin MIC group were found.

Investigation of the impact of the NICE guidelines regarding antibiotic prophylaxis during invasive dental procedures on the incidence of infective endocarditis in England: an electronic health records study.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis is an uncommon but serious infection, where evidence for giving antibiotic prophylaxis before invasive dental procedures is inconclusive. In England, antibiotic prophylaxis was offered routinely to patients at risk of infective endocarditis until March 2008, when new guidelines aimed at reducing unnecessary antibiotic use were issued. We investigated whether changes in infective endocarditis incidence could be detected using electronic health records, assessing the impact of inclusion criteria/statistical model choice on inferences about the timing/type of any change. METHODS: Using national data from Hospital Episode Statistics covering 1998-2017, we modelled trends in infective endocarditis incidence using three different sets of inclusion criteria plus a range of regression models, identifying the most likely date for a change in trends if evidence for one existed. We also modelled trends in the proportions of different organism groups identified during infection episodes, using secondary diagnosis codes and data from national laboratory records. Lastly, we applied non-parametric local smoothing to visually inspect any changes in trend around the guideline change date. RESULTS: Infective endocarditis incidence increased markedly over the study (22.2-41.3 per million population in 1998 to 42.0-67.7 in 2017 depending on inclusion criteria). The most likely dates for a change in incidence trends ranged from September 2001 (uncertainty interval August 2000-May 2003) to May 2015 (March 1999-January 2016), depending on inclusion criteria and statistical model used. For the proportion of infective endocarditis cases associated with streptococci, the most likely change points ranged from October 2008 (March 2006-April 2010) to August 2015 (September 2013-November 2015), with those associated with oral streptococci decreasing in proportion after the change point. Smoothed trends showed no notable changes in trend around the guideline date. CONCLUSIONS: Infective endocarditis incidence has increased rapidly in England, though we did not detect any change in trends directly following the updated guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis, either overall or in cases associated with oral streptococci. Estimates of when changes occurred were sensitive to inclusion criteria and statistical model choice, demonstrating the need for caution in interpreting single models when using large datasets. More research is needed to explore the factors behind this increase.

Risk of Infective Endocarditis After Invasive Dental Treatments: Case-Only Study.

BACKGROUND: Invasive dental treatments (IDTs) can yield temporary bacteremia and have therefore been considered a potential risk factor of infective endocarditis (IE). It is hypothesized that, through the trauma caused by IDTs, bacteria gain entry to the bloodstream and may attach to abnormal heart valves or damaged heart tissue, giving rise to IE. However, the association between IDTs and IE remains controversial. The aim of this study is to estimate the association between IDTs and IE. METHODS: The data in this study were obtained from the Health Insurance Database in Taiwan. We selected 2 case-only study designs, case-crossover and self-controlled case series, to analyze the data. The advantage of these methods is that confounding factors that do not vary with time are adjusted for implicitly. In the case-crossover design, a conditional logistic regression model with exposure to IDTs was used to estimate the risks of IE following an IDT with 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks delay, respectively. In the self-controlled case series design, a conditional Poisson regression model was used to estimate the risk of IE for the risk periods of 1 to 4, 5 to 8, 9 to 12, and 13 to 16 weeks following an IDT. RESULTS: In total, 9120 and 8181 patients with IE were included in case-crossover design and self-controlled case series design, respectively. In the case-crossover design, 277 cases and 249 controls received IDTs during the exposure period, and the odds ratio was 1.12 (95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.34) for 4 weeks. In the self-controlled case series design, we observed that 407 IEs occurred during the first 4 weeks after IDTs, and the age-adjusted incidence rate ratio was 1.14 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.26) for 1 to 4 weeks after IDTs. CONCLUSIONS: In both study designs, we did not observe a clinically larger risk for IE in the short periods after IDTs. We also found no association between IDTs and IE among patients with a high risk of IE. Therefore, antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of IE is not required for the Taiwanese population.