Search

Aims In left-sided infective endocarditis (IE), a large vegetation >10 mm is associated with higher mortality, yet it is unknown whether surgery during the acute phase opposed to medical therapy is associated with improved survival. We assessed the association between surgery and 6-month mortality as related to vegetation size. Methods and results Patients with definite, left-sided IE (2008–2012) from The International Collaboration on Endocarditis prospective, multinational registry were included. We compared clinical characteristics and 6-month mortality (by Cox regression with inverse propensity of treatment weighting) between patients with vegetation size ≤10 mm vs. >10 mm in maximum length by surgical treatment strategy. A total of 1006 patients with left sided IE were included; 422 with a vegetation size ≤10 mm (median age 66.0 years, 33% women) and 584 (median age 58.4 years, 34% women) patients with a large vegetation >10 mm. Operative risk by STS-IE score was similar between groups. Embolic events occurred in 28.4% vs. 44.3% (P  < 0.001), respectively. Patients with a vegetation >10 mm was associated with higher 6-month mortality (25.1% vs. 19.4% for small vegetation, P  = 0.035). However, after propensity adjustment, the association with higher mortality persisted only in patients with a large vegetation >10 mm vs. ≤10 mm: hazard ratio (HR) 1.55 (1.27–1.90); but only in patients with large vegetation managed medically [HR 1.86 (1.48–2.34)] rather than surgically [HR 1.01 (0.69–1.49)]. Conclusion Left-sided IE with vegetation size >10 mm was associated with an increased mortality at 6 months in this observational study but was dependent on treatment strategy. For patients with large vegetation undergoing surgical treatment, survival was similar to patients with smaller vegetation size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The appropriate duration of antibiotics for staphylococcal bacteremia is unknown.Objective: To test whether an algorithm that defines treatment duration for staphylococcal bacteremia vs standard of care provides noninferior efficacy without increasing severe adverse events.Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized trial involving adults with staphylococcal bacteremia was conducted at 16 academic medical centers in the United States (n = 15) and Spain (n = 1) from April 2011 to March 2017. Patients were followed up for 42 days beyond end of therapy for those with Staphylococcus aureus and 28 days for those with coagulase-negative staphylococcal bacteremia. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and had 1 or more blood cultures positive for S aureus or coagulase-negative staphylococci. Patients were excluded if they had known or suspected complicated infection at the time of randomization.Interventions: Patients were randomized to algorithm-based therapy (n = 255) or usual practice (n = 254). Diagnostic evaluation, antibiotic selection, and duration of therapy were predefined for the algorithm group, whereas clinicians caring for patients in the usual practice group had unrestricted choice of antibiotics, duration, and other aspects of clinical care.Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes were (1) clinical success, as determined by a blinded adjudication committee and tested for noninferiority within a 15% margin; and (2) serious adverse event rates in the intention-to-treat population, tested for superiority. The prespecified secondary outcome measure, tested for superiority, was antibiotic days among per-protocol patients with simple or uncomplicated bacteremia.Results: Among the 509 patients randomized (mean age, 56.6 [SD, 16.8] years; 226 [44.4%] women), 480 (94.3%) completed the trial. Clinical success was documented in 209 of 255 patients assigned to algorithm-based therapy and 207 of 254 randomized to usual practice (82.0% vs 81.5%; difference, 0.5% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -6.2% to ∞]). Serious adverse events were reported in 32.5% of algorithm-based therapy patients and 28.3% of usual practice patients (difference, 4.2% [95% CI, -3.8% to 12.2%]). Among per-protocol patients with simple or uncomplicated bacteremia, mean duration of therapy was 4.4 days for algorithm-based therapy vs 6.2 days for usual practice (difference, -1.8 days [95% CI, -3.1 to -0.6]).Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with staphylococcal bacteremia, the use of an algorithm to guide testing and treatment compared with usual care resulted in a noninferior rate of clinical success. Rates of serious adverse events were not significantly different, but interpretation is limited by wide confidence intervals. Further research is needed to assess the utility of the algorithm.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01191840. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Infective endocarditis occurs in approximately 15 of 100 000 people in the United States and has increased in incidence. Clinicians must make treatment decisions with respect to prophylaxis, surgical management, specific antibiotics, and the length of treatment in the setting of emerging, sometimes inconclusive clinical research findings.Observations: Community-associated infective endocarditis remains the predominant form of the disease; however, health care accounts for one-third of cases in high-income countries. As medical interventions are increasingly performed on older patients, the disease incidence from cardiac implanted electronic devices is also increasing. In addition, younger patients involved with intravenous drug use has increased in the past decade and with it the proportion of US hospitalization has increased to more than 10%. These epidemiological factors have led to Staphylococcus aureus being the most common cause in high-income countries, accounting for up to 40% of cases. The mainstays of diagnosis are still echocardiography and blood cultures. Adjunctive imaging such as cardiac computed tomographic and nuclear imaging can improve the sensitivity for diagnosis when echocardiography is not conclusive. Serological studies, histopathology, and polymerase chain reaction assays have distinct roles in the diagnosis of infective endocarditis when blood culture have tested negative with the highest yield obtained from serological studies. Increasing antibiotic resistance, particularly to S aureus, has led to a need for different antibiotic treatment options such as newer antibiotics and combination therapy regimens. Surgery can confer a survival benefit to patients with major complications; however, the decision to pursue surgery must balance the risks and benefits of operations in these frequently high-risk patients.Conclusions and Relevance: The epidemiology and management of infective endocarditis are continually changing. Guidelines provide specific recommendations about management; however, careful attention to individual patient characteristics, pathogen, and risk of sequela must be considered when making therapeutic decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This study aims to examine the use and safety of rifampin in the hospitalized infants. Study Design Observational study of clinical and laboratory adverse events among infants exposed to rifampin from 348 neonatal intensive care units managed by the Pediatrix Medical Group between 1997 and 2012. Result Overall, 2,500 infants received 4,279 courses of rifampin; mean gestational age was 27 weeks (5th, 95th percentile; 23, 36) and mean birth weight was 1,125 g (515; 2,830). Thrombocytopenia (121/1,000 infant days) and conjugated hyperbilirubinemia (25/1,000 infant days) were the most common laboratory adverse events. The most common clinical adverse events were medical necrotizing enterocolitis (64/2,500 infants, 3%) and seizure (60/2,500 infants, 2%). Conclusion The overall incidence of adverse events among infants receiving rifampin appears low; however, additional studies to further evaluate safety and dosing of rifampin in this population are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which investigates the effect of the guideline by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) which recommends the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for infective endocaditis prevention. The study made use of the DR. Foster Intellligence for data access of hospital activity for inpatients in England. The result of the study shows the lack of evidence for the upward trend of changed cases after the guideline introduction.

Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a common and serious complication in patients receiving chronic hemodialysis (HD).Objectives: This study sought to investigate whether there are significant differences in complications, cardiac surgery, relapses, and mortality between IE cases in HD and non-HD patients.Methods: Prospective cohort study (International Collaboration on Endocarditis databases, encompassing 7,715 IE episodes from 2000 to 2006 and from 2008 to 2012). Descriptive analysis of baseline characteristics, epidemiological and etiological features, complications and outcomes, and their comparison between HD and non-HD patients was performed. Risk factors for major embolic events, cardiac surgery, relapses, and in-hospital and 6-month mortality were investigated in HD-patients using multivariable logistic regression.Results: A total of 6,691 patients were included and 553 (8.3%) received HD. North America had a higher HD-IE proportion than the other regions. The predominant microorganism was Staphylococcus aureus (47.8%), followed by enterococci (15.4%). Both in-hospital and 6-month mortality were significantly higher in HD versus non-HD-IE patients (30.4% vs. 17% and 39.8% vs. 20.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). Cardiac surgery was less frequently performed among HD patients (30.6% vs. 46.2%; p < 0.001), whereas relapses were higher (9.4% vs. 2.7%; p < 0.001). Risk factors for 6-month mortality included Charlson score (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.44; p = 0.001), CNS emboli and other emboli (HR: 3.11; 95% CI: 1.84 to 5.27; p < 0.001; and HR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.93; p = 0.04, respectively), persistent bacteremia (HR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.88; p = 0.02), and acute onset heart failure (HR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.49 to 3.78; p < 0.001).Conclusions: HD-IE is a health care-associated infection chiefly caused by S. aureus, with increasing rates of enterococcal IE. Mortality and relapses are very high and significantly larger than in non-HD-IE patients, whereas cardiac surgery is less frequently performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The American Heart Association updated its recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) to prevent infective endocarditis (IE) in 2007, advising that AP cease for those at moderate risk of IE, but continue for those at high risk.Objectives: The authors sought to quantify any change in AP prescribing and IE incidence.Methods: High-risk, moderate-risk, and unknown/low-risk individuals with linked prescription and Medicare or commercial health care data were identified in the Truven Health MarketScan databases from May 2003 through August 2015 (198,522,665 enrollee-years of data). AP prescribing and IE incidence were evaluated by Poisson model analysis.Results: By August 2015, the 2007 recommendation change was associated with a significant 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 59% to 68%) estimated fall in AP prescribing for moderate-risk individuals and a 20% (95% CI: 4% to 32%) estimated fall for those at high risk. Over the same period, there was a barely significant 75% (95% CI: 3% to 200%) estimated increase in IE incidence among moderate-risk individuals and a significant 177% estimated increase (95% CI: 66% to 361%) among those at high risk. In unknown/low-risk individuals, there was a significant 52% (95% CI: 46% to 58%) estimated fall in AP prescribing, but no significant increase in IE incidence.Conclusions: AP prescribing fell among all IE risk groups, particularly those at moderate risk. Concurrently, there was a significant increase in IE incidence among high-risk individuals, a borderline significant increase in moderate-risk individuals, and no change for those at low/unknown risk. Although these data do not establish a cause-effect relationship between AP reduction and IE increase, the fall in AP prescribing in those at high risk is of concern and, coupled with the borderline increase in IE incidence among those at moderate risk, warrants further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]