Antistaphylococcal β-Lactams versus Vancomycin for Treatment of Infective Endocarditis Due to Methicillin-Susceptible Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci: a Prospective Cohort Study from the International Collaboration on Endocarditis

Microbiological Impacts of Decontamination of Stethoscopes and Assessment of Disinfecting Practices among Physicians in Pakistan: A Quality Improvement Survey

The study was conducted to determine bacterial contamination of stethoscopes used by doctors before and after disinfecting with isopropyl alcohol and analyze their practices of disinfecting stethoscopes. Samples from stethoscopes were taken before and after disinfecting with 70% isopropyl alcohol swab with the help of a sterile swab. All swabs were inoculated on Blood and MacConkey agar plates and were examined for growth. Stethoscopes of 78 doctors were sampled which included 45 (58%) males and 33 (42%) females. Before decontamination of diaphragms with isopropyl alcohol, 27 (34.6%) diaphragms had "growth" while 51 (65.4%) had "no growth." After decontamination with isopropyl alcohol, 5 (6.4%) had "growth" while 73 (93.6%) had "no growth." The most common microorganism isolated from stethoscopes' diaphragms was methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE), that is, 14 out of 78 (17.9%). The survey also evaluated factors associated with contamination of stethoscopes. Most doctors 71(91%) believe that stethoscopes can be a source of infection and 55.1% (N = 43) responded that both diaphragm and bell of stethoscopes can transmit infections. Many doctors (41%, N = 32) reported that "forgetfulness/laziness" was the barrier which they faced regarding stethoscope hygiene followed by "lack of time" (21.8%, N = 17). The contamination rate (66.6%) is highest in those doctors who are using their stethoscopes for 3-5 years. Of them, 30 doctors (38.5%) never decontaminated their stethoscopes among which 17 had growth in their stethoscopes before cleaning with isopropyl alcohol, while three had growth even after decontamination. Most doctors used sanitizer (29.5%) and isopropyl alcohol (25.6%) as cleaning agents.

Incidence and risk factors for mortality in patients treated with combined ceftaroline for Gram-positive infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Ceftaroline is a fifth-generation cephalosporin and represents an alternative in the treatment of infective endocarditis (IE). The main objective of this study was to describe the incidence of in-hospital and 42-day mortality in patients with IE treated with ceftaroline.

METHODS

An observational retrospective study included adult patients with IE admitted during a 3.5-year period (January 2018-June 2021) and treated with ceftaroline in a single center. All cases were definite or possible IE according to the modified Duke criteria.

RESULTS

Seventy cases were analyzed. The mean age was 67.35 ± 16.62 (16-89) and 39 (55.7%) were males. The mean number of days of treatment with ceftaroline was 21.26 ± 16.17 (1-75). Overall mortality at 42 days was 30%, 20.7% in the first line, and 36.6% in rescue therapy. Predictors of 42 days-mortality were increased Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (OR of 1.7 per 1 point increment, 95% CI 1.2-2.4, P 0.001), presence of methicillin-resistance (OR 6.8, 95% CI 1.3-36.8, P 0.026) and evidence of septic shock (OR 8.6 95% CI 1.7-44.2, P 0.01). Predictors of 42 days of therapeutic failure were the increase in the CCI (OR of 1.6 per 1 point increment, 95% CI 1.3-2.1, P 0.000) and septic shock (OR 4.5 95% CI 1.1-18 P 0.036). Adverse effects were described in 6/70 (8.6%) of the patients, precipitating in 4/70 (5.7%) the definitive withdrawal of the antibiotic.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of in-hospital and 42 day-mortality of IE patients treated with ceftaroline remains similar to literature data. Increased CCI, septic shock, and methicillin resistance are associated with poor prognosis.

Infective Endocarditis: New Challenges in a Classic Disease

Infective endocarditis is a relatively rare, but deadly infection, with an overall mortality of around 20% in most series. Clinical manifestations have evolved in response to significant epidemiological shifts in industrialized nations, with a move toward a nosocomial or health-care-related pattern, in older patients, with more episodes associated with prostheses and/or intravascular electronic devices and a predominance of staphylococcal and enterococcal etiology.Diagnosis is often challenging and is based on the conjunction of clinical, microbiological, and imaging information, with notable progress in recent years in the accuracy of echocardiographic data, coupled with the recent emergence of other useful imaging techniques such as cardiac computed tomography (CT) and nuclear medicine tools, particularly ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission/CT.The choice of an appropriate treatment for each specific case is complex, both in terms of the selection of the appropriate agent and doses and durations of therapy as well as the possibility of using combined bactericidal antibiotic regimens in the initial phase and finalizing treatment at home in patients with good evolution with outpatient oral or parenteral antimicrobial therapies programs. A relevant proportion of patients will also require valve surgery during the active phase of treatment, the timing of which is extremely difficult to define. For all the above, the management of infective endocarditis requires a close collaboration of multidisciplinary endocarditis teams.

Infective Endocarditis in Patients on Chronic Hemodialysis

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.

Current Challenges in the Management of Infective Endocarditis

Infective endocarditis is a relatively rare, but deadly cause of sepsis, with an overall mortality ranging from 20 to 25% in most series. Although the classic clinical classification into syndromes of acute or subacute endocarditis have not completely lost their usefulness, current clinical forms have changed according to the profound epidemiological changes observed in developed countries. In this review, we aim to address the changing epidemiology of endocarditis, several recent advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of endocarditis and endocarditis-triggered sepsis, new useful diagnostic tools as well as current concepts in the medical and surgical management of this disease. Given its complexity, the management of infective endocarditis requires the close collaboration of multidisciplinary endocarditis teams that must decide on the diagnostic approach; the appropriate initial treatment in the critical phase; the detection of patients needing surgery and the timing of this intervention; and finally the accurate selection of patients for out-of-hospital treatment, either at home hospitalization or with oral antibiotic treatment.

Prospective Cohort Study of Infective Endocarditis in People Who Inject Drugs

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis (IE) in people who inject drugs (PWID) is an emergent public health problem.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to investigate IE in PWID and compare it with IE in non-PWID patients.

METHODS

Two prospective cohort studies (ICE-PCS and ICE-Plus databases, encompassing 8,112 IE episodes from 2000 to 2006 and 2008 to 2012, with 64 and 34 sites and 28 and 18 countries, respectively). Outcomes were compared between PWID and non-PWID patients with IE. Logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate risk factors for 6-month mortality and relapses amongst PWID.

RESULTS

A total of 7,616 patients (591 PWID and 7,025 non-PWID) were included. PWID patients were significantly younger (median 37.0 years [interquartile range: 29.5 to 44.2 years] vs. 63.3 years [interquartile range: 49.3 to 74.0 years]; p < 0.001), male (72.5% vs. 67.4%; p = 0.007), and presented lower rates of comorbidities except for human immunodeficiency virus, liver disease, and higher rates of prior IE. Amongst IE cases in PWID, 313 (53%) episodes involved left-side valves and 204 (34.5%) were purely left-sided IE. PWID presented a larger proportion of native IE (90.2% vs. 64.4%; p < 0.001), whereas prosthetic-IE and cardiovascular implantable electronic device-IE were more frequent in non-PWID (9.3% vs. 27.0% and 0.5% vs. 8.6%; both p < 0.001). Staphylococcus aureus caused 65.9% and 26.8% of cases in PWID and non-PWID, respectively (p < 0.001). PWID presented higher rates of systemic emboli (51.1% vs. 22.5%; p < 0.001) and persistent bacteremia (14.7% vs. 9.3%; p < 0.001). Cardiac surgery was less frequently performed (39.5% vs. 47.8%; p < 0.001), and in-hospital and 6-month mortality were lower in PWID (10.8% vs. 18.2% and 14.4% vs. 22.2%; both p < 0.001), whereas relapses were more frequent in PWID (9.5% vs. 2.8%; p < 0.001). Prior IE, left-sided IE, polymicrobial etiology, intracardiac complications, and stroke were risk factors for 6-month mortality, whereas cardiac surgery was associated with lower mortality in the PWID population.

CONCLUSIONS

A notable proportion of cases in PWID involve left-sided valves, prosthetic valves, or are caused by microorganisms other than S. aureus.

How to manage patients in whom malignancy and infective endocarditis are associated: a review

Objective. Infective endocarditis (IE) is a potentially short-term lethal condition. An association with malignancy could complicate diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. The questions to be answered are: (1) which type of malignancies are encountered; (2) how often has the association between malignancy and IE been described, and (3) what are thus far the diagnostic and treatment strategies for patients with both conditions. Methods. A literature search from 2010 to 2018 has been performed with the focus on IE and cancer/malignancy/neoplasm, as well as with risk factors for adverse outcome, when cancer was included in the analysis. Results. An association between digestive, respiratory and hematologic malignancy with IE has been observed in four large databases. The most important mechanisms for this association are a "port of entry" and immune suppression. Sixteen studies dealt with the effect of short and mid-term cancer on the outcome of surgery of IE in these patients. No uniform management strategy could be identified. It seems that a malignancy does not alter the short-term outcome for IE, although referral to a tertiary cardiac center and surgical treatment are less common for patients with known malignancy. Conclusions. Although there is an association between malignancy and IE, no treatment strategy has yet been developed for these patients. Short-term outcome of IE is unaltered by cancer. In most papers, the effect of cancer on mid-term survival is only significant in a univariate analysis, without being a predictor. The results indicate that cardiac surgery for IE should not be withheld in patients in whom a treatable malignancy has been found.