4.2 Article

Prediction of Acute-phase Complications in Patients with Infectious Endocarditis

Journal

INTERNAL MEDICINE
Volume 58, Issue 16, Pages 2323-2331

Publisher

JAPAN SOC INTERNAL MEDICINE
DOI: 10.2169/internalmedicine.1813-18

Keywords

infective endocarditis; embolic event; embolic risk; French Calculator; cardiac surgery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective Embolic events are frequent and life-threatening complications of infective endocarditis (IE). Recently, an embolic risk assessment at admission, based on the Embolic Risk (ER) French Calculator, was designed to predict the development of symptomatic emboli associated with IE. This study aimed to validate the ER French Calculator for the prediction of in-hospital events, including embolic events. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical features of 52 consecutive patients with left-sided IE to identify possible predictors of in-hospital events within 30 days of admission. Results New embolic events were seen in 15 patients (29%), cardiac surgery was performed in 22 patients (42%), and 1 patient (2%) died within 30 days of admission. A composite endpoint of embolic complications, cardiac surgery, or death was observed in 28 patients (54%). The cumulative incidence of new embolic events was significantly higher in the high-risk group identified by the ER French Calculator than in the low-risk group (log-rank test; p=0004). The incidence of the composite endpoint was higher in the high-risk group than in the low-risk group (log-rank test; p<0.0001). A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model indicated that the high-risk designation on the ER French Calculator predicted embolic events (p=0410) and composite events (p=0.0371) independently of other candidate predictors. Conclusion The ER French Calculator may be a useful tool for predicting new in-hospital embolic events and other unfavorable in-hospital events in patients with 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

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available