4.6 Review

Infective endocarditis

Journal

NATURE REVIEWS CARDIOLOGY
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages 322-336

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/nrcardio.2011.43

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation/Swiss Medical Association (FMH) [PASMP3-123226]
  2. SICPA Foundation
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation [3200B0-113854]
  4. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [PASMP3-123226] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Infective endocarditis (IE) is lethal if not aggressively treated with antibiotics alone or in combination with surgery. The epidemiology of this condition has substantially changed over the past four decades, especially in industrialized countries. Once a disease that predominantly affected young adults with previously well-identified valve disease-mostly chronic rheumatic heart disease-IE now tends to affect older patients and new at-risk groups, including intravenous-drug users, patients with intracardiac devices, and patients exposed to healthcare-associated bacteremia. As a result, skin organisms (for example, Staphylococcus spp.) are now reported as the pathogen in these populations more often than oral streptococci, which still prevail in the community and in native-valve IE. Moreover, progress in molecular diagnostics has helped to improve the diagnosis of poorly cultivable pathogens, such as Bartonella spp. and Tropheryma whipplei, which are responsible for blood-culture-negative IE more often than expected. Epidemiological data indicate that IE mostly occurs independently of medico-surgical procedures, and that circumstantial antibiotic prophylaxis is likely to protect only a minute proportion of individuals at risk. Therefore, new strategies to prevent IE-including improvement of dental hygiene, decontamination of carriers of Staphylococcus aureus, vaccination, and, possibly, antiplatelet therapy-must be explored.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available