Cardiovascular disease after Escherichia coli O157:H7 gastroenteritis

Bacterial toxins and heart function: heat-labile Escherichia coli enterotoxin B promotes changes in cardiac function with possible relevance for sudden cardiac death

Bacterial toxins can cause cardiomyopathy, though it is not its most common cause. Some bacterial toxins can form pores in the membrane of cardiomyocytes, while others can bind to membrane receptors. Enterotoxigenic E. coli can secrete enterotoxins, including heat-resistant (ST) or labile (LT) enterotoxins. LT is an AB5-type toxin that can bind to specific cell receptors and disrupt essential host functions, causing several common conditions, such as certain diarrhea. The pentameric B subunit of LT, without A subunit (LTB), binds specifically to certain plasma membrane ganglioside receptors, found in lipid rafts of cardiomyocytes. Isolated guinea pig hearts and cardiomyocytes were exposed to different concentrations of purified LTB. In isolated hearts, mechanical and electrical alternans and an increment of heart rate variability, with an IC50 of ~0.2 μg/ml LTB, were observed. In isolated cardiomyocytes, LTB promoted significant decreases in the amplitude and the duration of action potentials. Na+ currents were inhibited whereas L-type Ca2+ currents were augmented at their peak and their fast inactivation was promoted. Delayed rectifier K+ currents decreased. Measurements of basal Ca2+ or Ca2+ release events in cells exposed to LTB suggest that LTB impairs Ca2+ homeostasis. Impaired calcium homeostasis is linked to sudden cardiac death. The results are consistent with the recent view that the B subunit is not merely a carrier of the A subunit, having a role explaining sudden cardiac death in children (SIDS) infected with enterotoxigenic E. coli, explaining several epidemiological findings that establish a strong relationship between SIDS and ETEC E. coli.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12551-023-01100-6.

Gut Microbiota and Coronary Artery Disease: Current Therapeutic Perspectives

The human gut microbiota is the community of microorganisms living in the human gut. This microbial ecosystem contains bacteria beneficial to their host and plays important roles in human physiology, participating in energy harvest from indigestible fiber, vitamin synthesis, and regulation of the immune system, among others. Accumulating evidence suggests a possible link between compositional and metabolic aberrations of the gut microbiota and coronary artery disease in humans. Manipulating the gut microbiota through targeted interventions is an emerging field of science, aiming at reducing the risk of disease. Among the interventions with the most promising results are probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, and trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) inhibitors. Contemporary studies of probiotics have shown an improvement of inflammation and endothelial cell function, paired with attenuated extracellular matrix remodeling and TMAO production. Lactobacilli, Bifidobacteria, and Bacteroides are some of the most well studied probiotics in experimental and clinical settings. Prebiotics may also decrease inflammation and lead to reductions in blood pressure, body weight, and hyperlipidemia. Synbiotics have been associated with an improvement in glucose homeostasis and lipid abnormalities. On the contrary, no evidence yet exists on the possible benefits of postbiotic use, while the use of antibiotics is not warranted, due to potentially deleterious effects. TMAO inhibitors such as 3,3-dimethyl-1-butanol, iodomethylcholine, and fluoromethylcholine, despite still being investigated experimentally, appear to possess anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anti-fibrotic properties. Finally, fecal transplantation carries conflicting evidence, mandating the need for further research. In the present review we summarize the links between the gut microbiota and coronary artery disease and elaborate on the varied therapeutic measures that are being explored in this context.

Risk of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients with Gastroenteritis: A Nationwide Case-Control Study

Gastroenteritis promotes the development of systemic inflammation and a hypercoagulable state. There are limited data regarding the association between gastroenteritis and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We aimed to evaluate the risk of AMI after an episode of gastroenteritis. In this nested case-control study, we selected patients who were hospitalized for AMI (N = 103,584) as a case group during 2010-2017 and performed propensity score matching (case-control ratio 1:1) to select eligible controls from insurance research data in Taiwan. We applied multivariable logistic regressions to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of AMI associated with recent gastroenteritis within 14 days before AMI. We also compared the outcomes after AMI in patients with or without gastroenteritis. A total of 1381 patients (1.3%) with AMI had a prior episode of gastroenteritis compared to 829 (0.8%) among the controls. Gastroenteritis was significantly associated with a subsequent risk of AMI (adjusted OR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.54-1.83), which was augmented in hospitalizations for gastroenteritis (adjusted OR: 2.50, 95% CI: 1.20-5.21). The outcomes after AMI were worse in patients with gastroenteritis than in those without gastroenteritis, including increased 30-day in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08-1.52), medical expenditure, and length of hospital stay. Gastroenteritis may act as a trigger for AMI and correlates with worse post-AMI outcomes. Strategies of aggressive hydration and/or increased antithrombotic therapies for this susceptible population should be further developed.

Antibiotics for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease

BACKGROUND

Coronary heart disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide with approximately 7.4 million deaths each year. People with established coronary heart disease have a high risk of subsequent cardiovascular events including myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death. Antibiotics might prevent such outcomes due to their antibacterial, antiinflammatory, and antioxidative effects. However, a randomised clinical trial and several observational studies have suggested that antibiotics may increase the risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. Furthermore, several non-Cochrane Reviews, that are now outdated, have assessed the effects of antibiotics for coronary heart disease and have shown conflicting results. No previous systematic review using Cochrane methodology has assessed the effects of antibiotics for coronary heart disease.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the benefits and harms of antibiotics compared with placebo or no intervention for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, SCI-EXPANDED, and BIOSIS in December 2019 in order to identify relevant trials. Additionally, we searched TRIP, Google Scholar, and nine trial registries in December 2019. We also contacted 11 pharmaceutical companies and searched the reference lists of included trials, previous systematic reviews, and other types of reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in adult participants (≥18 years). Trials were included irrespective of setting, blinding, publication status, publication year, language, and reporting of our outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse event according to the International Conference on Harmonization - Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP), and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and sudden cardiac death. Our primary time point of interest was at maximum follow-up. Additionally, we extracted outcome data at 24±6 months follow-up. We assessed the risks of systematic errors using Cochrane 'Rosk of bias' tool. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated absolute risk reduction (ARR) or increase (ARI) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) or for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) if the outcome result showed a beneficial or harmful effect, respectively. The certainty of the body of evidence was assessed by GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 trials randomising a total of 26,638 participants (mean age 61.6 years), with 23/38 trials reporting data on 26,078 participants that could be meta-analysed. Three trials were at low risk of bias and the 35 remaining trials were at high risk of bias. Trials assessing the effects of macrolides (28 trials; 22,059 participants) and quinolones (two trials; 4162 participants) contributed with the vast majority of the data. Meta-analyses at maximum follow-up showed that antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention seemed to increase the risk of all-cause mortality (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.13; P = 0.07; I2 = 0%; ARI 0.48%; NNTH 208; 25,774 participants; 20 trials; high certainty of evidence), stroke (RR 1.14; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.29; P = 0.04; I2 = 0%; ARI 0.73%; NNTH 138; 14,774 participants; 9 trials; high certainty of evidence), and probably also cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.25; P = 0.11; I2= 0%; 4674 participants; 2 trials; moderate certainty of evidence). Little to no difference was observed when assessing the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.03; P = 0.23; I2 = 0%; 25,523 participants; 17 trials; high certainty of evidence). No evidence of a difference was observed when assessing sudden cardiac death (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.31; P = 0.41; I2 = 0%; 4520 participants; 2 trials; moderate certainty of evidence). Meta-analyses at 24±6 months follow-up showed that antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention increased the risk of all-cause mortality (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.48; P = 0.007; I2 = 0%; ARI 1.26%; NNTH 79 (95% CI 335 to 42); 9517 participants; 6 trials; high certainty of evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.50; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.91; P = 0.001; I2 = 0%; ARI 1.12%; NNTH 89 (95% CI 261 to 49); 9044 participants; 5 trials; high certainty of evidence), and probably also sudden cardiac death (RR 1.77; 95% CI 1.28 to 2.44; P = 0.0005; I2 = 0%; ARI 1.9%; NNTH 53 (95% CI 145 to 28); 4520 participants; 2 trials; moderate certainty of evidence). No evidence of a difference was observed when assessing the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.11; P = 0.53; I2 = 43%; 9457 participants; 5 trials; moderate certainty of evidence) and stroke (RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.52; P = 0.24; I2 = 0%; 9457 participants; 5 trials; high certainty of evidence). Meta-analyses of trials at low risk of bias differed from the overall analyses when assessing cardiovascular mortality at maximum follow-up. For all other outcomes, meta-analyses of trials at low risk of bias did not differ from the overall analyses. None of the trials specifically assessed serious adverse event according to ICH-GCP. No data were found on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our present review indicates that antibiotics (macrolides or quinolones) for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease seem harmful when assessing the risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke at maximum follow-up and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and sudden cardiac death at 24±6 months follow-up. Current evidence does, therefore, not support the clinical use of macrolides and quinolones for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Future trials on the safety of macrolides or quinolones for the secondary prevention in patients with coronary heart disease do not seem ethical. In general, randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of antibiotics, especially macrolides and quinolones, need longer follow-up so that late-occurring adverse events can also be assessed.

Role of gut microbiota in atherosclerosis

Infections have been linked to the development of cardiovascular disease and atherosclerosis. Findings from the past decade have identified microbial ecosystems residing in different habitats of the human body that contribute to metabolic and cardiovascular-related disorders. In this Review, we describe three pathways by which microbiota might affect atherogenesis. First, local or distant infections might cause a harmful inflammatory response that aggravates plaque development or triggers plaque rupture. Second, metabolism of cholesterol and lipids by gut microbiota can affect the development of atherosclerotic plaques. Third, diet and specific components that are metabolized by gut microbiota can have various effects on atherosclerosis; for example, dietary fibre is beneficial, whereas the bacterial metabolite trimethylamine-N-oxide is considered harmful. Although specific bacterial taxa have been associated with atherosclerosis, which is supported by increasing mechanistic evidence, several questions remain to be answered to understand fully how the microbiota contributes to atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. Such knowledge might pave the way for novel diagnostics and therapeutics based on microbiota.

Therapeutic administration of the chemokine CXCL1/KC abrogates autoimmune inflammatory heart disease

Myocarditis, often due to an aberrant immune response to infection, is a major cause of dilated cardiomyopathy. Microbial pattern recognition receptors, such as TLRs, orchestrate the cytokine and chemokine responses that augment or limit the severity of myocarditis. Using the mouse model of experimental autoimmune myocarditis (EAM), in which disease is induced by immunization with a heart-specific self peptide and the agonist to multiple TLRs, complete Freund's adjuvant, we found that increased serum concentrations of the chemokine CXCL1/KC correlated directly with decreased severity of myocarditis. To directly test whether CXCL1/KC caused the amelioration of myocarditis, we treated mice, after challenge with heart-specific self peptide, with exogenous recombinant CXCL1/KC. We found that the administration of recombinant mouse CXCL1/KC completely abrogated heart inflammatory infiltration and cardiomyocyte damage. Moreover, we show that TLR4 signaling is required to increase serum protein concentrations of CXCL1/KC in EAM, and we demonstrate that the administration of the TLR4 agonist LPS significantly decreased severity and prevalence of EAM and reduced the number of heart-specific self peptide reactive effector T cells. These findings reveal a novel function of CXCL1/KC in the context of organ-specific autoimmune disease that may prove useful for the treatment of inflammatory conditions that underlie human heart disease.

Verotoxigenic Escherichia coli: costs of illness in Canada, including long-term health outcomes

The main objective of this study was to provide cost estimates of human Escherichia coli O157 infection to facilitate future assessment of the benefits and costs of alternative preventive strategies to reduce illness. We investigated the costs of illness to Canadians from primary human infection by verotoxigenic E. coli O157 (also called Shiga toxin-producing E. coli O157) using data from the National Notifiable Diseases Registry. We used relative risk information from peer-reviewed publications to estimate the burden of illness and associated costs for eight long-term health outcomes. National estimates of the number of cases (mean and 5th and 95th percentiles), associated costs, and a rank correlation test to identify which outcomes were associated with the highest per capita costs were calculated. An estimated 22,344 cases of primary infections occur in Canada annually, costing $26.7 million. There are 37,867 additional on-going long-term health outcomes costing $377.2 million each year. Our analysis indicated that the annual cost for primary and long-term illness is $403.9 million. The analysis supports evaluation of alternative control and prevention measures and the development and implementation of policy and practices aimed at safe food production.

Comparison between ImmunoCard STAT!(®) and real-time PCR as screening tools for both O157:H7 and non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in Southern Alberta, Canada

An increasing number of non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) infections and outbreaks have been reported. In this study, we evaluated the performance of ImmunoCard STAT!(®) (Meridian Bioscience, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, USA) as a method to screen stool specimens for STEC (O157 and non-O157). An in-house real-time PCR method was used as the "gold standard". We also evaluated the prevalence and clinical characteristics of STEC infections in the Alberta South West Zone. From July to November 2011, 819 stool specimens submitted for routine stool culture were tested. With our in-house real-time PCR, 7 O157:H7 and 10 non-O157 STEC isolates were identified for a total of 17 STECs. In comparison, ImmunoCard STAT!(®) identified a total of 6, resulting in a sensitivity and specificity of 35% and 99%, respectively (P < 0.05). Because of the low sensitivity, ImmunoCard STAT!(®) cannot be recommended as a routine screening test for STEC from enriched stool specimens. The rate of STEC positivity as detected by PCR was 2.08%, of which 0.86% was O157:H7 and 1.22% non-O157 STEC. Five of the 7 cases of STEC O157 infection experienced bloody diarrhea, and 1 developed hemolytic uremic syndrome.