4.1 Article

Changes in Patient Characteristics of Infective Endocarditis with Congenital Heart Disease: 25 Years Experience in a Single Institution

Journal

KOREAN CIRCULATION JOURNAL
Volume 44, Issue 1, Pages 37-41

Publisher

KOREAN SOC CARDIOLOGY
DOI: 10.4070/kcj.2014.44.1.37

Keywords

Infective endocarditis; Heart disease; congenital

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Objectives: The profile of infective endocarditis (IE) has changed and is now showing an increasing prevalence of IE among congenital heart disease (CHD) patients. We studied the change of clinical profiles of IE over the past 25 years in patients with CHD at a single institution. Subjects and Methods: We reviewed medical records retrospectively for 325 patients diagnosed with IE between January 1, 1987, and March 31, 2012. We analyzed and compared the differences in patient characteristics and outcomes between 1987-2000 (group A) and 2001-2012 (group B). Results: Over the 25-year period, 93 cases of IE in CHD patients were diagnosed (59 cases in group A and 34 cases in group B). Ventricular septal defect was the most common underlying cardiac disease observed during the entire period. The most common causative pathogen was Streptococcus in both groups. Group A contained 16 cases (27.1%) that had undergone cardiac surgery, whereas this number was 19 (55.8%) in group B. The number of patients who had undergone palliative care or surgery using prosthetic materials was higher among group B patients (p<0.001). Surgical procedures due to uncontrolled infection were performed in three cases in group A and 10 cases in group B. Conclusion: Infective endocarditis and CHD show a close correlation, and the profile of IE patients can change in line with an increase in the survival rate of patients with complex CHD and the improvement of surgical techniques. Ongoing reassessment and the systematic management of these patients is crucial in the prevention and treatment of IE.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available