Search

Objectives: We sought to determine the incidence, diagnostic value, and outcome of intracardiac masses observed by echocardiography after device removal. We hypothesized that these "ghosts" of leads could be associated with the diagnosis of cardiac device-related infective endocarditis (CDRIE)., Background: The echocardiographic appearance of residual floating masses in the right atrium after removal of permanent pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators was recently described. However, the significance of these ghosts and their relationship with CDRIE are unknown., Methods: The pre-operative clinical, microbiological, and echocardiographic conditions; the indication; and the removal technique were analyzed in a retrospective cohort including all consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous lead removal. Three groups were formed according to the final diagnosis: CDRIE, local device infection, and noninfectious indications. The incidence of ghosts was compared among the 3 groups. All clinical, infectious, and extraction-related factors were studied for their association with ghosts. All patients with ghosts were followed after hospitalization., Results: Two hundred twelve patients underwent lead removal. Ghosts were observed in 17 patients (8% incidence), including 14 (16%) of 88 patients with CDRIE and 3 (5%) of 59 patients with local device infection. Ghosts were never observed among the remaining 65 noninfected patients. A significant association was found between CDRIE and the presence of a ghost (odds ratio: 7.63, 95% confidence interval: 2.12 to 27.45, p = 0.001). At 3 months, 2 patients with ghosts died suddenly, 2 underwent surgery, and 1 had a pulmonary embolism., Conclusions: Ghosts are observed in 8% of patients after percutaneous device extraction. Their presence is suggestive of device infection and seems to be associated with the diagnosis of CDRIE. The prognostic significance of such findings needs further investigation., (Copyright 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess incidence and predictors of events associated with nonsurgical and surgical management of severe mitral regurgitation (MR) in European institutions., Background: The management of patients with MR remains disputed, warranting multicenter studies to define clinical outcome in routine clinical practice., Methods: The MIDA (Mitral Regurgitation International DAtabase) is a registry created for multicenter study of MR with echocardiographically diagnosed flail leaflet as a model of pure, organic MR. Our cases were collected from 4 European centers. We enrolled 394 patients (age 64 +/- 11 years; 67% men; 64% in New York Heart Association functional class I to II; left ventricular ejection fraction 67 +/- 10%)., Results: During a median follow-up of 3.9 years, linearized event rates/year under nonsurgical management were 5.4% for atrial fibrillation (AF), 8.0% for heart failure (HF), and 2.6% for death. Mitral valve (MV) surgery was performed in 315 (80%) patients (repair in 250 of 315, 80%). Perioperative mortality, defined as death within 30 days from the operation, was 0.7% (n = 2). Surgery during follow-up was independently associated with reduced risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21 to 0.84; p = 0.014). Benefit was largely driven by MV repair (adjusted HR vs. replacement 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76; p = 0.007). In 102 patients strictly asymptomatic and with normal ventricular function, 5-year combined incidence of AF, HF, or cardiovascular death (CVD) was 42 +/- 8%. In these patients, surgery also reduced rates of CVD/HF (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.89; p = 0.032)., Conclusions: In this multicenter study, nonsurgical management of severe MR was associated with notable rates of adverse events. Surgery especially MV repair performed during follow-up was beneficial in reducing rates of cardiac events. These findings support surgical consideration in patients with MR due to flail leaflets for whom MV repair is feasible.

Background: Surgical treatment of active aortic infective endocarditis is challenging, and the type of prosthesis to be implanted during the active phase remains controversial., Methods: All consecutive patients with definite diagnosis of aortic infective endocarditis operated on during the active phase were included. Endpoints were in-hospital mortality and a combined endpoint including infective endocarditis recurrence, prostheses dysfunction, or long-term cardiovascular mortality., Results: Among 127 consecutive patients, mean age 57 +/- 15 years, 87% male, 30% with preexisting aortic prosthesis, and 63 (50%) with annulus abscess, 54 (43%) were treated with aortic homograft and 73 (57%) with conventional prosthesis. Median time between diagnosis and surgery was 10 days. In-hospital mortality was 9%, not different between homograft and conventional prostheses (11% versus 8%, p[ = 0.6). By multivariable analysis, prosthetic valve endocarditis (8.5 95% confidence interval: 2.2 to 33.6, ]p = 0.001) was the only variable independently associated with in-hospital mortality, which was not influenced by type valvular substitute (p = 0.6), even in the subset with annulus abscess (p = 0.2). Ten-year survival free from the combined endpoint was 44% +/- 10%, not different between homograft and conventional prostheses (log rank p = 0.2). By multivariable analysis, comorbidity index (2.6 [1.05 to 6.3], p = 0.04) and prosthetic valve endocarditis (2.3 [1.2 to 4.6], p = 0.02) were independently predictive of the combined endpoint, which was not determined by type of valvular substitute (p = 0.6) even in the subset with annulus abscess (p = 0.5)., Conclusions: Implantation of conventional prostheses during the active phase of aortic endocarditis yields similar low operative mortality and long-term prognosis as compared with aortic homografts, even in patients with annulus abscess.