A comparison of different antibiotic regimens for the treatment of infective endocarditis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Marti-Carvajal AJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7527143 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe role of oral antibiotic therapy in treating infective endocarditis (IE) is not well established.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus for studies in which oral antibiotic therapy was used for the treatment of IE.ResultsSeven observational studies evaluating the use oral beta-lactams (five), oral ciprofloxacin in combination with rifampin (one), and linezolid (one) for the treatment of IE caused by susceptible bacteria reported cure rates between 77% and 100%. Two other observational studies using aureomycin or sulfonamide, however, had failure rates >75%. One clinical trial comparing oral amoxicillin versus intravenous ceftriaxone for streptococcal IE reported 100% cure in both arms but its reporting had serious methodological limitations. One small clinical trial (n = 85) comparing oral ciprofloxacin and rifampin versus conventional intravenous antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated right-sided S. aureus IE in intravenous drug users (IVDUs) reported cure rates of 89% and 90% in each arm, respectively (P =0.9); however, drug toxicities were more common in the latter group (62% versus 3%; P <0.01). Major limitations of this trial were lack of allocation concealment and blinding at the delivery of the study drug(s) and assessment of outcomes.ConclusionReported cure rates for IE treated with oral antibiotic regimens vary widely. The use of oral ciprofloxacin in combination with rifampin for uncomplicated right-sided S. aureus IE in IVDUs is supported by one small clinical trial of relatively good quality and could be considered when conventional IV antibiotic therapy is not possible.
| S-EPMC4007569 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2007, the American Heart Association recommended that antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) be restricted to those at high risk of developing complications due to infective endocarditis (IE) undergoing invasive dental procedures. The authors aimed to estimate the appropriateness of AP prescribing according to type of dental procedure performed in patients at high risk, moderate risk, or low or unknown risk of developing IE complications.MethodsEighty patients at high risk, 40 patients at moderate risk, and 40 patients at low or unknown risk of developing IE complications were randomly selected from patients with linked dental care, health care, and prescription benefits data in the IBM MarketScan Databases, one of the largest US health care convenience data samples. Two clinicians independently analyzed prescription and dental procedure data to determine whether AP prescribing was likely, possible, or unlikely for each dental visit.ResultsIn patients at high risk of developing IE complications, 64% were unlikely to have received AP for invasive dental procedures, and in 32 of 80 high-risk patients (40%) there was no evidence of AP for any dental visit. When AP was prescribed, several different strategies were used to provide coverage for multiple dental visits, including multiday courses, multidose prescriptions, and refills, which sometimes led to an oversupply of antibiotics.ConclusionsAP prescribing practices were inconsistent, did not always meet the highest antibiotic stewardship standards, and made retrospective evaluation difficult. For those at high risk of developing IE complications, there appears to be a concerning level of underprescribing of AP for invasive dental procedures.Practical implicationsSome dentists might be failing to fully comply with American Heart Association recommendations to provide AP cover for all invasive dental procedures in those at high risk of developing IE complications.
| S-EPMC7959887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Complete genome sequencing of Enterococcus faecalis strains suggests a role of Ebp deletions in infective endocarditis relapses
| PRJEB31504 | ENA
Project description:BackgroundOutpatient parenteral antibiotic treatment (OPAT) programs are increasingly used to manage infective endocarditis (IE), but current criteria for indicating OPAT are markedly conservative. We aimed to investigate whether more liberal criteria for indicating OPAT in IE can be safely used.MethodsThis was a prospective multicenter nationwide cohort study (2008-2018). Rates of readmission, recurrences, and 1-year mortality were compared between hospital-based antibiotic treatment (HBAT) and OPAT. Risk factors for readmission and mortality in OPAT patients were investigated by logistic regression. Patients did not fulfill OPAT-GAMES (Grupos de Apoyo al Manejo de la Endocarditis en ESpaña) criteria if they had any of the following: cirrhosis, severe central nervous system emboli, undrained abscesses, severe conditions requiring cardiac surgery in nonoperable patients, severe postsurgical complications, highly difficult-to-treat microorganisms, or intravenous drug use.ResultsA total of 2279 HBAT patients and 1268 OPAT patients were included. Among OPAT patients, 307 (24.2%) did not fulfill OPAT-GAMES criteria. Overall, OPAT patients presented higher rates of readmission than HBAT patients (18.2% vs 14.4%; P = .004), but no significant differences were found in the propensity analysis. Patients not fulfilling OPAT-GAMES criteria presented significantly higher rates of readmission than HBAT and OPAT-GAMES (23.8%, 14.4%, 16.4%; P < .001), whereas no significant differences were found in mortality (5.9%, 8%, 7.4%; P = .103) or recurrences (3.9%, 3.1%, 2.5%; P = .546). Not fulfilling OPAT-GAMES criteria was associated with higher risk of readmission (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% CI, 1.03-1.97; P = .03), whereas cardiac surgery was associated with lower risk (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53-0.98; P = .03).ConclusionsOPAT-GAMES criteria allow identification of IE patients at higher risk of long-term complications to whom OPAT cannot be safely administered.
| S-EPMC9512706 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMost serious complications of infective endocarditis (IE) appear in the so-called "critical phase" of the disease, which represents the first days after diagnosis. The majority of patients overcoming the acute phase has a favorable outcome, yet they remain hospitalized for a long period of time mainly to complete antibiotic therapy. The major hypothesis of this trial is that in patients with clinically stable IE and adequate response to antibiotic treatment, without signs of persistent infection, periannular complications or metastatic foci, a shorter antibiotic time period would be as efficient and safe as the classic 4 to 6 weeks antibiotic regimen.MethodsMulticenter, prospective, randomized, controlled open-label, phase IV clinical trial with a non-inferiority design to evaluate the efficacy of a short course (2 weeks) of parenteral antibiotic therapy compared with conventional antibiotic therapy (4-6 weeks).Samplepatients with IE caused by gram-positive cocci, having received at least 10 days of conventional antibiotic treatment, and at least 7 days after surgery when indicated, without clinical, analytical, microbiological or echocardiographic signs of persistent infection. Estimated sample size: 298 patients.InterventionControl group: standard duration antibiotic therapy, (4 to 6 weeks) according to ESC guidelines recommendations. Experimental group: short-course antibiotic therapy for 2 weeks. The incidence of the primary composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, unplanned cardiac surgery, symptomatic embolisms and relapses within 6 months after the inclusion in the study will be prospectively registered and compared.ConclusionsSATIE will investigate whether a two weeks short-course of intravenous antibiotics in patients with IE caused by gram-positive cocci, without signs of persistent infection, is not inferior in safety and efficacy to conventional antibiotic treatment (4-6 weeks).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04222257 (January 7, 2020). EudraCT 2019-003358-10.
| S-EPMC7298739 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Infective endocarditis (IE) is a rare, life-threatening disease that has long-lasting effects even among patients who survive and are cured. IE disproportionately affects those with underlying structural heart disease and is increasingly associated with health care contact, particularly in patients who have intravascular prosthetic material. In the setting of bacteraemia with a pathogenic organism, an infected vegetation may form as the end result of complex interactions between invading microorganisms and the host immune system. Once established, IE can involve almost any organ system in the body. The diagnosis of IE may be difficult to establish and a strategy that combines clinical, microbiological and echocardiography results has been codified in the modified Duke criteria. In cases of blood culture-negative IE, the diagnosis may be especially challenging, and novel microbiological and imaging techniques have been developed to establish its presence. Once diagnosed, IE is best managed by a multidisciplinary team with expertise in infectious diseases, cardiology and cardiac surgery. Antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of IE remains controversial. Efforts to develop a vaccine that targets common bacterial causes of IE are ongoing, but have not yet yielded a commercially available product.
| S-EPMC5240923 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Infective endocarditis is a relatively rare complication of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Infective endocarditis in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is almost always seen in patients with outflow obstruction and is more common in those with both outflow obstruction and atrial dilatation. We present a case of culture negative mitral valve endocarditis in a previously asymptomatic woman with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who died in the course of the disease.
| S-EPMC3941094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The goal of this prospective observational study was to identify adverse events (AEs) related to the use of intravenous access sites used for infective endocarditis (IE) treatment in a tertiary care hospital. This is an observational, analytical and prospective study on AEs resulting from the use of intravenous access sites in patients under antimicrobial treatment for IE. Patients enrolled in the International Collaboration on Endocarditis (ICE) study had their peripheral, short-term central catheters (CVC) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) monitored for AEs. Tertiary care hospital for cardiac surgery in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Patients over 14 years of age, hospitalised in 2009 and 2010 with possible or definite criteria for IE by the modified Duke criteria were included. AEs related to intravenous catheters: erythema and infiltration, fever, obstruction, externalisation and blood stream infection. Thirty-seven episodes of IE in 35 patients were studied. Mean patient age was 44.32±15.2 years; 22 (63%) were men. The number of vascular catheters studied were 253, 148 of which were peripheral, 85 CVC (21 of which for haemodialysis) and 20 PICC. The most frequent AEs were 'erythema' and 'infiltration' for peripheral catheters, 'fever' for CVCs and 'obstruction' and 'externalisation' for PICCs. The number of catheter-days was 360 for peripheral catheters, 1.156 for CVC and 420 for PICC. Kaplan-Meier curves for CVC and PICC showed statistical difference for obstruction (p<0.001) in PICCs. More bacteraemia occurred in CVC compared with PICC. The choice of intravenous access sites is critical in the treatment of IE. Close observation for AEs and stricter implementation of infection control measures and better manipulation of catheters are suggested.
| S-EPMC3534239 | biostudies-literature