Search

Background: Enterococcus faecalis is the third most frequent cause of infective endocarditis (IE). Despite this, no systematic prospective echocardiography studies have examined the prevalence of IE in patients with E. faecalis bacteremia., Objectives: This study sought to determine the prevalence of IE in patients with E. faecalis bacteremia. The secondary objective was to identify predictors of IE., Methods: From January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016, a prospective multicenter study was conducted with echocardiography in consecutive patients with E. faecalis bacteremia. Predictors of IE were assessed using multivariate logistic regression with backward elimination., Results: A total of 344 patients with E. faecalis bacteremia were included, all examined using echocardiography, including transesophageal echocardiography in 74% of the cases. The patients had a mean age of 74.2 years, and 73.5% were men. Definite endocarditis was diagnosed in 90 patients, resulting in a prevalence of 26.1 ± 4.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]). Risk factors for IE were prosthetic heart valve (odds ratio [OR]: 3.93; 95% CI: 1.76 to 8.77; p = 0.001), community acquisition (OR: 3.35; 95% CI: 1.74 to 6.46; p < 0.001), ≥3 positive blood culture bottles (OR: 3.69; 95% CI: 1.88 to 7.23; p < 0.001), unknown portal of entry (OR: 2.36; 95% CI: 1.26 to 4.40; p = 0.007), monomicrobial bacteremia (OR: 2.73; 95% CI: 1.23 to 6.05; p = 0.013), and immunosuppression (OR: 2.82; 95% CI: 1.20 to 6.58; p = 0.017)., Conclusions: This study revealed a high prevalence of 26% definite IE in patients with E. faecalis bacteremia, suggesting that echocardiography should be considered in all patients with E. faecalis bacteremia., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The NOVA score is a recently developed diagnostic tool used to identify patients with increased risk of infective endocarditis (IE) among patients with Enterococcus faecalis bacteremia. We aimed to validate the NOVA score and to identify risk factors for IE., Methods: From 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2013, we included 647 consecutive patients with E. faecalis bacteremia. The NOVA score was used in a slightly adapted form; 2/2 positive blood cultures resulted in 5 points, unknown origin of infection in 4 points, prior valve disease in 2 points, and heart murmur in 1 point., Results: IE was diagnosed in 78 patients (12%). Monomicrobial E. faecalis bacteremia (hazard ratio [HR], 3.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-8.0), prosthetic heart valve (HR, 6.2; 95% CI, 3.8-10.1), male sex (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.8), and community acquisition (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.9) were independently associated with IE. The adapted NOVA score was applied in the 240 patients examined by echocardiography. A low score (<4) was found in 40 patients (17%), implying a low likelihood of IE. Of the 78 patients with IE, 76 had a high score (≥4), resulting in a sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 23%, a negative predictive value of 95%, and a positive predictive value of 38%., Conclusions: Monomicrobial E. faecalis bacteremia, community acquisition, prosthetic heart valve, and male sex are associated with increased risk of IE. In our retrospective cohort, the adapted NOVA score performed well, suggesting that it could be useful in guiding clinical decisions., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Enterococcus faecalis infective endocarditis (IE) is a disease of increasing importance, with more patients infected, increasing frequency of health-care associated infections and increasing incidence of antimicrobial resistances. The typical clinical presentation is a subacute course with fever, malaise and generalized aches, difficult to distinguish from other more common diseases. Of paramount importance is transthoracic- and transesophageal-echocardiography to establish the diagnosis. At the moment, the predominant strategies recommend ampicillin in combination with either gentamicin or ceftriaxone. E. faecalis infective endocarditis continues to be a very serious disease with considerable percentages of high-level gentamicin resistant strains and in-hospital mortality around 20%. Strategies to prevent E. faecalis IE, improve diagnostics, optimize treatment and reduce morbidity will be necessary to improve the overall prognosis.

Background: Because of the nephrotoxic effects of aminoglycosides, the Danish guidelines on infective endocarditis were changed in January 2007, reducing gentamicin treatment in enterococcal infective endocarditis from 4 to 6 weeks to only 2 weeks. In this pilot study, we compare outcomes in patients with Enterococcus faecalis infective endocarditis treated in the years before and after endorsement of these new recommendations., Methods and Results: A total of 84 consecutive patients admitted with definite left-sided E faecalis endocarditis in the period of 2002 to 2011 were enrolled. Forty-one patients were treated before and 43 patients were treated after January 1, 2007. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. At hospitalization, the 2 groups had similar estimated glomerular filtration rates of 66 and 75 mL/min (P=0.22). Patients treated before January 2007 received gentamicin for a significantly longer period (28 versus 14 days; P<0.001). The primary outcome, 1-year event-free survival, did not differ: 66% versus 69%, respectively (P=0.75). At discharge, the patients treated before 2007 had a lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (45 versus 66 mL/min; P=0.008) and a significantly greater decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (median, 11 versus 1 mL/min; P=0.009) compared with those treated after 2007., Conclusions: Our present pilot study suggests that the recommended 2-week treatment with gentamicin seems adequate and preferable in treating non-high-level aminoglycoside-resistant E faecalis infective endocarditis. The longer duration of gentamicin treatment is associated with worse renal function. Although the certainty of the clinical outcomes is limited by the sample size, outcomes appear to be no worse with the shorter treatment duration. Randomized, controlled studies are warranted to substantiate these results.

Enterococcal bacteraemia (EB) is common, particularly in the nosocomial setting, and its management poses a challenge for clinicians and microbiologists. The aim was to summarize the more relevant features of EB and to provide a practical state-of-the-art on the topics that more directly affect its management. Pubmed articles from inception to 31 May 2020. The following topics are covered: epidemiological, clinical and microbiological characteristics and factors associated with prognosis of EB; diagnosis and work-up, including the use of echocardiography to rule out endocarditis; antibiotic management with special focus on antimicrobial resistance and complicated EB; and the role of infectious disease consultation and the use of bundles in EB. In addition, three clinical vignettes are presented to illustrate the practical application of the guidance provided, and major gaps in the current evidence supporting EB management are discussed. EB is associated with large burdens of morbidity and mortality, particularly among fragile and immunosuppressed patients presenting complicated bacteraemia due to multidrug-resistant enterococci. Most cases of EB are caused by Enterococcus faecalis , followed by E. faecium. EB often presents as polymicrobial bacteraemia. Rapidly identifying patients at risk of EB is crucial for timely application of diagnostic techniques and empiric therapy. Early alert systems and rapid diagnostic techniques, such as matrix-assisted desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry, especially if used together with infectious disease consultation within bundles, appear to improve management and prognosis of EB. Echocardiography is also key in the work-up of EB and should probably be more extensively used, although its exact indications in EB are still debated. Multidisciplinary approaches are warranted due to the complexity and severity of EB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]