Endocarditis risk with bioprosthetic and mechanical valves: systematic review and meta-analysis

Mechanical versus Biological Valve Prostheses for Infective Endocarditis Presenting with Stroke

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of mechanical and biological valve prostheses in patients with infective endocarditis presenting with stroke. Methods: Ninety-five adults with infective endocarditis complicated by stroke at baseline who underwent aortic and/or mitral valve replacement were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and re-endocarditis. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the composite outcome and modified Rankin scale deterioration during follow-up. Results: Among the study cohort, 34 patients (35.8%) received mechanical valve prostheses and 61 (64.2%) received biological valve prostheses. Implantation of a mechanical valve prosthesis seems to be associated with a decreased risk of attaining the composite outcome (adjusted HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96, and p = 0.037). Analyses of the individual components of the composite outcome showed that implantation of a mechanical valve prosthesis might not be associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and all-cause mortality during the follow-up period. Further, the risk of re-endocarditis was significantly lower in recipients of a mechanical valve prosthesis (adjusted HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06-0.77, p = 0.026). Notably, a trend toward decreased risk of modified Rankin scale deterioration throughout the follow-up period was observed in this group (adjusted odds ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-1.02, p = 0.053). Conclusions: Implantation of mechanical valve prostheses in patients presenting with infective endocarditis complicated by stroke seems to be beneficial in terms of a reduced risk of experiencing a composite outcome. Analyses of larger cohorts are required to validate our findings.

Homograft Aortic Root Replacement for Destructive Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis: Results in the Current Era

Background: Destructive aortic prosthetic valve endocarditis portends a high morbidity and mortality, and requires complex high-risk surgery. Homograft root replacement is the most radical and biocompatible operation and, thus, the preferred option. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 61 consecutive patients who underwent a cardiac reoperation comprising homograft aortic root replacement since 2010. The probabilities of survival were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method, whereas multivariable regression served to outline the predictors of adverse events. The endpoints were operative/late death, perioperative low cardiac output and renal failure, and reoperations. Results: The operative (cumulative hospital and 30-day) mortality was 13%. The baseline aspartate transaminase (AST) and associated mitral procedures were predictive of operative death (p = 0.048, OR [95% CIs] = 1.03 [1-1.06]) and perioperative low cardiac output, respectively (p = 0.04, OR [95% CIs] = 21.3 [2.7-168.9] for valve replacement). The latter occurred in 12 (20%) patients, despite a normal ejection fraction. Survival estimates (±SE) at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years after surgery were 86.3 ± 4.7%, 82.0 ± 4.9%, 75.2 ± 5.6, and 70.0 ± 6.3%, respectively. Survival was significantly lower in the case of AST ≥ 40 IU/L (p = 0.04) and aortic cross-clamp time ≥ 180 min (p = 0.01), but not when excluding operative survivors. Five patients required early (two out of the five, within 3 months) or late (three out of the five) reoperation. Conclusions: Homograft aortic root replacement for destructive prosthetic valve endocarditis can currently be performed with a near 90% operative survival and reasonable 3-year mortality and reoperation rate. AST might serve to additionally stratify the operative risk.

Rothia dentocariosa endocarditis with brain abscess and splenic abscess: case report and brief review

Rothia dentocariosa is a conditionally pathogenic bacterium that may cause infective endocarditis (IE) in selected patients and give rise to a variety of clinical complications, albeit it is not a common IE pathogen. We present the case of a patient diagnosed with Rothia dentocariosa-associated IE secondary to influenza B and thrombocytopenic purpura. The blood culture revealed Rochebacterium caries, cardiac ultrasound detected vegetation, while brain and spleen abscesses manifested and progressively deteriorated. Despite a suboptimal response to anti-infective therapy, the patient ultimately underwent aortic valve replacement. Discharge from the hospital was achieved upon control of the brain abscess and spleen abscess.

Features of infective endocarditis in a contemporary cohort of persons who inject drugs: a matched comparison analysis of long-term prognostic factors

The objective of the study was to assess the short- and long-term mortality of infective endocarditis (IE) among people who inject drugs (PWID). Using prospectively collected data on hospitalized patients (years 2000 through 2021) with IE, PWID were identified and included in this study. Survival analysis was performed to analyze short- and long-term mortality and study their risk factors among PWID and a matched group of non-intravenous drug users (N-IDU). In a study of 485 patients admitted for IE, 55 (11%) of them were PWID. These PWID patients were 1:1 age- and sex- matched to an N-IDU group (N = 55 per group). Both groups had similar baseline comorbid conditions, including congestive heart failure, type 2 diabetes, and neoplastic diseases. However, PWID were more likely to have HCV co-infection (62% vs 16%, respectively, p < 0.001) and advanced liver disease/cirrhosis (52% vs 7.9%, respectively, p < 0.001). IE in PWID more often affected the tricuspid valve (42% vs 22%, respectively, p = 0.024) and presented with more embolic events (66% vs 35%, respectively, p < 0.01). S. aureus was the primary cause of IE in PWID (44% vs 21%, respectively, p = 0.01). After adjusting for other variables, PWID (HR = 2.99, 95% CI [1.06, 8.43], p = 0.038) and valve bioprosthetic replacement (HR = 5.37, 95% CI [1.3, 22.1], p = 0.02) were independently associated with increased mortality risk, whereas IE caused by tricuspid valve infection was associated with reduced mortality risk (HR = 0.25, 95% CI [0.06, 0.97], p = 0.046). In this cohort, PWID had increased risk of long-term mortality after hospital discharge for IE, when compared to matched N-IDU with similar baseline characteristics. The reasons behind the significant increase in mortality warrant further investigation.

Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis After Aortic Valve Replacement: Differences Between Biological and Mechanical Prostheses

AIMS

Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) is the most severe form of infective endocarditis associated with a high mortality rate. Whether PVE affects biological and mechanical aortic valves to the same extent remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of re-intervention because of PVE between bioprosthetic and mechanical valves.

METHODS

Patients undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) or combined AVR in a single cardiac surgery centre between January 1998 and December 2019 were analysed. All patients who underwent re-intervention because of PVE were identified. The primary endpoint was the rate of explants. Freedom from re-intervention and variables associated with re-intervention were analysed using Cox regression analysis including correction for competing risk.

RESULTS

During the study period, 5,983 aortic valve prostheses were implanted, including 3,620 biological (60.5%) and 2,363 mechanical (39.5%) prostheses. The overall mean follow-up period was 7.3±5.3 years (median, 6.5; IQR 2.9-11.2 years). The rate of re-intervention for PVE in the biological group was 1.5% (n=54) compared with 1.7% (n=40) in the mechanical group (p=0.541). Cox regression analysis revealed that younger age (HR 0.960, 95% CI 0.942-0.979; p<0.001), male sex (HR 2.362, 95% CI 1.384-4.033; p=0.002), higher creatinine (HR 1.002, 95% CI 0.999-1.004; p=0.057), and biological valve prosthesis (HR 2.073, 95% CI 1.258-3.414; p=0.004) were associated with re-intervention for PVE. After correction for competing risk of death, biological valve prosthesis was significantly associated with a higher rate of re-intervention for PVE (HR 2.011, 95% CI 1.177-3.437; p=0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

According to this single-centre, observational, retrospective cohort study, AVR using biological prosthesis is associated with re-intervention for PVE compared to mechanical prosthesis. Further investigations are needed to verify these findings.

Prosthesis Choice in Dialysis Patients Undergoing Mitral Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Patients with renal disease on dialysis have significant comorbidity limiting life expectancy; however, these patients may experience accelerated prosthetic valve degeneration. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of prosthesis choice on outcomes in dialysis patients undergoing mitral valve replacement (MVR) at our high-volume academic center.

METHODS

Adults undergoing MVR were retrospectively reviewed between January 2002 and November 2019. Patients were included if they had documented renal failure and dialysis requirements before presentation. Patients were stratified by mechanical vs bioprosthetic prosthesis. Death and recurrent severe valve failure (3+ or greater) or redo mitral operation were used as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 177 dialysis patients identified who underwent MVR. Of these, 118 (66.7%) received bioprosthetic valves, whereas 59 (33.3%) received mechanical valves. Those who received mechanical valves were younger (48 vs 61 years; P < .001) and had less diabetes (32% vs 51%; P = .019). Prevalence of endocarditis and atrial fibrillation was similar. Postoperative length of stay was not different between groups. Risk-adjusted hazard for 5-year mortality was similar between groups (P = .668). Early mortality was high, with both groups having <50% actuarial survival at 2 years. No differences were noted in rates of structural valve deterioration or reintervention. More stroke events were noted on follow-up in patients receiving mechanical valves (15% vs 6%; P = .041). Endocarditis was the leading reason for reintervention; 4 patients received repeated surgery for bioprosthetic valve failure.

CONCLUSIONS

MVR in dialysis patients carries significant morbidity and increased midterm mortality. Decreased life expectancy should be considered in the tailoring of prosthesis choice to dialysis-dependent patients.

Durability of bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement in patients under the age of 60 years - 1-year follow-up from the prospective INDURE registry

OBJECTIVES

We report 1-year safety and clinical outcomes in patients <60 years undergoing bioprosthetic surgical aortic valve intervention.

METHODS

The INSPIRIS RESILIA Durability Registry is a prospective, multicentre registry to assess clinical outcomes of patients <60 years. Patients with planned SAVR with or without concomitant replacement of the ascending aorta and/or coronary bypass surgery were included. Time-related valve safety, haemodynamic performance and quality of life (QoL) at 1 year were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 421 patients were documented with a mean age of 53.5 years, 76.5% being male and 27.2% in NYHA class III/IV. Outcomes within 30 days included cardiovascular-related mortality (0.7%), time-related valve safety (VARC-2; 5.8%), thromboembolic events (1.7%), valve-related life-threatening bleeding (VARC-2; 4.3%) and permanent pacemaker implantation (3.8%). QoL was significantly increased at 6 months and sustained at 1 year. Freedom from all-cause mortality at 1 year was 98.3% (95% confidence interval 97.1; 99.6) and 81.8% were NYHA I versus 21.9% at baseline. No patient developed structural valve deterioration stage 3 (VARC-3). The mean aortic pressure gradient was 12.6 mmHg at 1 year and the effective orifice area was 1.9 cm2.

CONCLUSIONS

The 1-year data from the INSPIRIS RESILIA valve demonstrate good safety and excellent haemodynamic performance as well as an early QoL improvement.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03666741.

Trends in SAVR with biological vs. mechanical valves in middle-aged patients: results from a French large multi-centric survey

Background/introduction

Currently, despite continued issues with durability ( 1), biological prosthetic valves are increasingly chosen over mechanical valves for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in adult patients of all ages, at least in Western countries. For younger patients, this choice means assuming the risks associated with a redo SAVR or valve-in-valve procedure.

Purpose

To assess the use of mechanical vs. biological valve prostheses for SAVR relative to patient's age and implant time in a large population extracted from the French National Database EPICARD.

Methods

Patients in EPICARD undergoing SAVR from 2007 to 2022 were included from 22 participating public or private centers chosen to represent a balanced representation of centre sizes and geographical discrepancies. Patients with associated pathology of the aorta (aneurysm or dissection) and requiring a vascular aortic prosthesis were excluded. Comparisons were made amongst centers, valve choice, implant date range, and patient age.

Results

We considered 101,070 valvular heart disease patients and included 72,375 SAVR (mean age 71.4 ± 12.2 years). We observed a mechanical vs. biological prosthesis ratio (MBPR) of 0.14 for the overall population. Before 50 years old (y-o), MBPR was >1.3 (p < 0.001) while patients above 60 years-old received principally biological SAVR (p < 0.0001). Concerning patients between 50 and 60 years-old patients, MPVR was 1.04 (p = 0.03). Patients 50-60 years-old from the first and second study duration quartile (before August 2015) received preferentially mechanical SAVR (p < 0.001). We observed a shift towards more biological SAVR (p < 0.001) for patients from the third and fourth quartile to reach a MBPR at 0.43 during the last years of the series. Incidentally, simultaneous mitral valve replacement were more common in case of mechanical SAVR (p < 0.0001), while associated CABGs were more frequent in case of biological SAVR (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

In a large contemporary French patient population, real world practice showed a recent shift towards a lower age-threshold for biological SAVR as compared to what would suggest contemporary guidelines.

Does Quality of Life in Survivors of Surgery for Acute Left-Sided Infective Endocarditis Differ from Non-Endocarditis Patients?

Surgery for left-sided infective endocarditis (IE) has been demonstrated to improve patients' survival rates but information about quality of life (QoL) after surgery is scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the postoperative outcomes and QoL after surgery for IE patients compared to patients undergoing cardiac surgery for non-IE indications. Adult patients with definite acute left-sided IE were matched 1:1 to patients who underwent cardiac surgery for non-endocarditic purposes from 2014 to 2019. QoL was assessed using the SF-36 survey at the last follow-up. A total of 105 patients were matched. The IE group had higher rates of preoperative stroke (21% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.005) and higher stages of NYHA class (p < 0.001), EuroSCORE II (12.3 vs. 3.0, p < 0.001) and blood cell count abnormalities (p < 0.001). The IE group had higher incidence of low cardiac output syndrome (13.3% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.029), dialysis (10.5% vs 1.0%, p = 0.007) and prolonged mechanical ventilation (16.2% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.002) after surgery. At the last follow-up, subcomponents of the SF-36 QoL survey were not different between the groups. Patients who underwent cardiac surgery for IE demonstrated a higher risk profile with a higher rate of postoperative complications. Once recovered from the acute phase of the disease, the reported QoL at follow-up was comparable to that of matched cardiac patients operated for non-IE purposes.

Infective Endocarditis-Update for the Perioperative Clinician

Infective endocarditis is a common pathology routinely encountered by perioperative physicians. There has been a need for a comprehensive review of this important topic. In this expert review, the authors discuss in detail the incidence, etiology, definition, microbiology, and trends of infective endocarditis. The authors discuss the clinical and imaging criteria for diagnosing infective endocarditis and the perioperative considerations for the same. Other imaging modalities to evaluate infective endocarditis also are discussed. Furthermore, the authors describe in detail the clinical risk scores that are used for determining clinical prognostic criteria and how they are tied to the current societal guidelines. Knowledge about native and prosthetic valve endocarditis, with emphasis on the timing of surgical intervention-focused surgical approaches and analysis of current outcomes, are critical to managing such patients, especially high-risk patients like those with heart failure, patients with intravenous drug abuse, and with internal pacemakers and defibrillators in situ. And lastly, with the advancement of percutaneous transcatheter valves becoming a norm for the management of various valvular pathologies, the authors discuss an in-depth review of transcatheter valve endocarditis with a focus on its incidence, the timing of surgical interventions, outcome data, and management of high-risk patients.

Infective endocarditis after transcatheter pulmonary valve implantation in patients with congenital heart disease: Distinctive features

The introduction of transcatheter pulmonary valve implantation (TPVI) has greatly benefited the management of right ventricular outflow tract dysfunction. Infective endocarditis (IE) is a feared complication of TPVI that affects valve durability and patient outcomes. Current recommendations provide only limited guidance on the management of IE after TPVI (TPVI-IE). This article, by a group of experts in congenital heart disease in children and adults, interventional cardiology, infectious diseases including IE, and microbiology, provides a comprehensive review of the current evidence on TPVI-IE, including its incidence, risk factors, causative organisms, diagnosis, and treatment. The incidence of TPVI-IE varies from 13-91/1000 person-years for Melody valves to 8-17/1000 person-years for SAPIEN valves. Risk factors include history of IE, DiGeorge syndrome, immunosuppression, male sex, high residual transpulmonary gradient and portal of bacteria entry. Staphylococci and streptococci are the most common culprits, whereas Staphylococcus aureus is associated with the most severe disease. In addition to the modified Duke criteria, a high residual gradient warrants a strong suspicion. Imaging studies are helpful for the diagnosis. Intravenous antibiotics guided by blood culture results are the mainstay of treatment. Invasive re-intervention may be required. TPVI-IE in patients with congenital heart disease exhibits several distinctive features. Whether specific valve types are associated with a higher risk of TPVI-IE requires further investigation. Patient and parent education regarding IE prevention may have a role to play and should be offered to all patients.

Long-term outcomes of mechanical versus biological valve prosthesis in native mitral valve infective endocarditis

Objectives. To study the long-term outcomes of mitral valve replacement with mechanical or biological valve prostheses in native mitral valve infective endocarditis patients. Desing. We conducted a retrospective, nationwide, multicenter cohort study with patients aged ≤70 years who were treated with mitral valve replacement for native mitral valve infective endocarditis in Finland between 2004 and 2017. Results. The endpoints were all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and mitral valve reoperations. The results were adjusted for baseline features (age, gender, comorbidities, history of drug abuse, concomitant surgeries, operational urgency, and surgical center). The median follow-up time was 6.1 years. The 12-year cumulative mortality rates were 36% for mechanical prostheses and 74% for biological prostheses (adj. HR 0.40; CI: 0.17-0.91; p = 0.03). At follow-up, the ischemic stroke had occurred in 19% of patients with mechanical prosthesis and 33% of those with a biological prosthesis (adj. p = 0.52). The major bleeding rates within the 12-year follow-up period were 30% for mechanical prosthesis and 13% for a biological prosthesis (adj. p = 0.29). The mitral valve reoperation rates were 13% for mechanical prosthesis and 12% for a biological prosthesis (adj. p = 0.50). Drug abuse history did not have a significant modifying impact on the results (interaction p = 0.51 for mortality and ≥0.13 for secondary outcomes). Conclusion. The use of mechanical mitral valve prosthesis is associated with lower long-term mortality compared to the biological prosthesis in non-elder native mitral valve infective endocarditis patients. The routine choice of biological mitral valve prostheses for this patient group is not supported by the results.

Cardiac Imaging for Diagnosis and Management of Infective Endocarditis

Imaging is central to the care of patients with infective endocarditis. While transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography are the principle imaging techniques, additional modalities including positron emission tomography and cardiac computed tomography, and to a lesser extent intracardiac echocardiography, play an increasing role. This review discusses the role of cardiac imaging in establishing the diagnosis of endocarditis, in predicting its embolic risk and in making decisions regarding the need for and timing of surgery.

Changes and advances in the field of infective endocarditis

Infective endocarditis is a rare but deadly disease, with a highly variable presentation. The clinical manifestations of the condition are often multisystemic, ranging from dermatological to ophthalmic, and cardiovascular to renal. Thus, patients with infective endocarditis may first present to the acute or general physician, who may have a variable knowledge of the condition. The diagnosis of infective endocarditis can be challenging, relying on clinical, imaging and microbiological features. Recent decades have seen a transformation in the epidemiology and microbiology of infective endocarditis and yet, despite advances in diagnostics and therapeutics, mortality rates remain high. This review outlines the emerging studies and guidelines on the assessment and management of infective endocarditis, focusing on the evolving epidemiology of the condition, the role of new imaging modalities, updated diagnostic criteria, the latest on antimicrobial and surgical management, and the role of a multidisciplinary approach in the management of patients with infective endocarditis.

Clinical Profile of Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis due to Candida parapsilosis: An 11-year Retrospective Observational Study from a Quaternary Cardiac Referral Institute in India

Background: Recent changes in the diagnostic criteria and the introduction of newer technologies like prosthetic valve replacement require the need to identify the changing epidemiology of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE).

Materials and methods: This is a retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study. Patients diagnosed with Candida parapsilosis definite and possible PVE as per modified Duke’s criteria for a period of 11 years from January 2010 to December 2020 were included for the analysis.

Results: Twelve of the 47 PVE cases (25.5%) were caused by C. parapsilosis. The median age of the patients was 52 years. Males were predominantly affected (58%). Based on the modified Duke’s criteria, eight (67%) were definite infective endocarditis (IE) cases. The single valve was affected in 11 cases (92%) with the mitral valve being the commonest (n = 8, 67%). The type of valve commonly involved was mechanical [n = 10, 83%]. The mean size of the vegetation was 13.15 mm. Most cases (n = 7, 58%) were late-onset PVE. The mean C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and procalcitonin (PCT) levels for C. parapsilosis PVE were 70.2 mg/L, 51.08 mm/hour, and 0.3 ng/mL, respectively. The rates of complications and in-hospital mortality were 75% each. The most common observed complication was embolic events (n = 8, 67%). Statistical significance (p ≤ 0.05) was observed for mean vegetation size, overall complications, embolic events, and mortality for C. parapsilosis PVE when compared with bacterial PVE.

Conclusion:C. parapsilosis was the commonest etiological agent causing PVE. Predominant mitral valve involvement, higher rates of late-onset presentation, complications, and mortality were key differential characteristics observed.

Highlights: The manuscript throws light on the changing epidemiology, clinical, and microbiological profile of PVE due to Candida sp., which are scarcely studied and reported in low- and middle-income countries like India.

How to cite this article: Ponnambath DK, Gopalakrishnan A, Pillai VV, Kaviyil JE, Raja K. Clinical Profile of Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis due to Candida parapsilosis: An 11-year Retrospective Observational Study from a Quaternary Cardiac Referral Institute in India. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(8):860–865.

Rapid Progression of Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Endocarditis: From Paraprosthetic Abscesses into Tricuspid Valve Infiltration

We present a case of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) in a 49-year-old gentleman with a history of bioprosthetic valve replacement following infective endocarditis of the aortic valve. He was pyrexial on arrival and electrocardiogram showed complete heart block. Transthoracic echocardiography and transoesophageal echocardiography revealed evidence of multiple echogenic, hypodensities within the paraprosthetic regions of the aortic bioprosthetic valve, suggestive of paravalvular abscesses, and infiltration into the right ventricle via the septal leaflet of the tricuspid valve. Early PVE is often nosocomial and ultimate management include radical debridement and major reconstruction with an expectedly high risk for mortality and post-operative complications.

Endocarditis in Patients with Aortic Valve Prosthesis: Comparison between Surgical and Transcatheter Prosthesis

The interventional treatment of aortic stenosis is currently based on transcatheter aortic valve implantation/replacement (TAVI/TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Prosthetic valve infective endocarditis (PVE) is the most worrisome complication after valve replacement, as it still carries high mortality and morbidity rate. Studies have not highlighted the differences in the occurrence of PVE in SAVR as opposed to TAVR, but the reported incidence rates are widely uneven. Literature portrays different microbiological profiles for SAVR and TAVR PVE: Staphylococcus, Enterococcus, and Streptococcus are the pathogens that are more frequently involved with differences regarding the timing from the date of the intervention. Imaging by means of transoesophageal echocardiography, and computed tomography (CT) Scan is essential in identifying vegetations, prosthesis dysfunction, dehiscence, periannular abscess, or aorto-ventricular discontinuity. In most cases, conservative medical treatment is not able to prevent fatal events and surgery represents the only viable option. The primary objectives of surgical treatment are radical debridement and the removal of infected tissues, the reconstruction of cardiac and aortic morphology, and the restoration of the aortic valve function. Different surgical options are discussed. Fast diagnosis, the adequacy of antibiotics treatment, and prompt interventions are essential in preventing the negative consequences of infective endocarditis (IE).