In this large, prospective, multinational cohort, more than one half of all cases of non-HACEK gram-negative bacillus endocarditis were associated with health care contact. Non-HACEK gram-negative bacillus endocarditis is not primarily a disease of injection drug users.
Background
The clinical profile and outcome of nosocomial and non-nosocomial health care–associated native valve endocarditis are not well defined.
Objective
To describe the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of nosocomial and non-nosocomial health care–associated native valve endocarditis.
Design
Prospective observational study.
Setting
61 hospitals in 28 countries.
Patients
Patients with definite native valve endocarditis and no history of injection drug use who were enrolled in the International Collaboration on Endocarditis–Prospective Cohort Study from June 2000 to August 2005.
Measurements
Characteristics of nosocomial and non-nosocomial health care–associated native valve endocarditis cases were described and compared with those cases acquired in the community.
Results
Health care–associated native valve endocarditis was present in 557 (34%) of 1622 patients with native valve endocarditis and no history of injection drug use (nosocomial native valve endocarditis 303 patients [54%]; non-nosocomial health care–associated native valve endocarditis 254 patients [46%]). Staphylococcus aureus was the most common cause of health care-associated native valve endocarditis (nosocomial native valve endocarditis, 47%; non-nosocomial health care–associated native valve endocarditis, 42%; p=0.3), with a notable proportion of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (nosocomial native valve endocarditis, 57%; non-nosocomial health care–associated native valve endocarditis, 41%; p=0.014). Patients with health care–associated native valve endocarditis had lower rates of cardiac surgery (41% health care–associated native valve endocarditis vs 51% community-acquired native valve endocarditis, p<0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality rates than patients with community-acquired native valve endocarditis (25% health care–associated native valve endocarditis vs. 13% community-acquired native valve endocarditis vs., p<0.001). Multivariable analysis confirmed a higher mortality associated with health care–associated native valve endocarditis (incidence risk ratio=1.20 (CI 95%, 1.03–1.61).
Limitations
This study involves tertiary hospitals with cardiac surgery programs. The results may not be generalized to patient populations receiving care in other types of facility.
Conclusions
More than one-third of all cases of native valve endocarditis in non-drug users involve contact with health care. S. aureus is the leading cause of health care–associated native valve endocarditis. Non-nosocomial health care–associated native valve endocarditis is common, especially in the US. Patients with health care-associated and community-acquired native valve endocarditis differ in their presentation, microbiology, and outcome. By contrast, patients with nosocomial and non-nosocomial healthcare-associated endocarditis are similar.
Ceftaroline fosamil achieved high clinical cure and microbiological response rates in patients hospitalized with CAP of PORT risk class III or IV. Ceftaroline fosamil was well tolerated, with a safety profile that is similar to that of ceftriaxone and other cephalosporins. Ceftaroline fosamil is a promising agent for the treatment of CAP.
Ceftaroline fosamil demonstrated high clinical cure and microbiological success rates, was efficacious against cSSSIs caused by MRSA and other common cSSSI pathogens and was generally well tolerated. Monotherapy with ceftaroline fosamil has the potential to provide an alternative treatment for cSSSIs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.