Endocarditis with spondylodiscitis: clinical characteristics and prognosis

Contemporary applications of multimodality imaging in infective endocarditis

INTRODUCTION

Infective endocarditis (IE) is an increasingly important condition with significant morbidity and mortality. With advancements in cardiovascular interventions including prosthetic valve implantation and utilization of intracardiac devices, the prevalence of IE is rising in the modern era. Early detection and management of this condition are critical.

AREAS COVERED

This review presents a contemporary review of the applications of multi-modality imaging in IE, taking a comparative approach of the various imaging modalities.

EXPERT OPINION

Transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography are essential imaging modalities in establishing the diagnosis of IE, as well as evaluating for complications of IE. Other imaging modalities such as cardiac computed tomography and nuclear imaging play an important role as adjuvant imaging modalities for the evaluation of IE, particularly in prosthetic valve IE and cardiovascular implantable device associated IE. It is crucial to understand the strengths, weaknesses, and clinical application of each imaging modality, to improve the diagnosis, management, and outcomes of patients with IE.

Infective endocarditis in intravenous drug abusers: clinical challenges emerging from a single-centre experience

Background

Intravenous drug abuse (IDA) is a known risk factor for infective endocarditis (IE) and is associated with frequent relapses, but its prognostic impact is still debated. The potential futility of surgery in this population is a further issue under discussion. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, the therapeutic strategy, and the prognosis associated with IDA in IE.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed 440 patients admitted to a single surgical centre for definite active IE from January 2012 to December 2020.

Results

Patients reporting IDA (N = 54; 12.2%) were significantly younger (p < 0.001) and presented fewer comorbidities (p < 0.001). IDA was associated with a higher proportion of relapses (27.8 vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001) and, at multivariable analysis, was an independent predictor of long-term mortality (HR 2.3, 95%CI 1.1–4.7, p = 0.015). We did not register multiple relapses in non-IDA patients. Among IDA patients, we observed 1 relapse after discharge in 9 patients, 2 relapses in 5 patients and 3 relapses in 1 patient. In IDA patients, neither clinical and laboratory variables nor the occurrence of even multiple relapses emerged as indicators of an adverse risk–benefit ratio of surgery in patients with surgical indication.

Conclusions

IE secondary to IDA affects younger patients than those with IE not associated with IDA. Probably due to this difference, IE secondary to IDA is not associated with significantly higher mortality, whereas the negative, long-term prognostic impact of IDA emerges in multivariate analysis. Considering the good prognosis of patients with uncomplicated IE treated medically, surgery should be reserved to patients with a strict- guidelines-based indication. However, since there are no clear predictors of an unfavourable risk–benefit ratio of surgery in patients with surgical indication, all patients with a complicated IE should be operated, irrespective of a history of IDA.