Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33852085›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of pediatrics2021

Infective endocarditis in paediatric population.

Loay Eleyan, Ameer Ahmed Khan, Gledisa Musollari, Ashwini Suresh Chandiramani, Simran Shaikh, Ahmad Salha, Abdulla Tarmahomed, Amer Harky

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Novel Diagnostic Methods for Infective Endocarditis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Case report:Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Loay EleyanSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Life Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Ameer Ahmed KhanSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Life Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Gledisa MusollariImperial College London, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London, SW7 2BU, UK.
Ashwini Suresh ChandiramaniUniversity of Glasgow, Medical school, University Avenue, G12 8QQ, Glasgow, UK.
Simran ShaikhSt. Georges University of London, Cranmer Terrace, Tooting, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Ahmad SalhaSt. Georges University of London, Cranmer Terrace, Tooting, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Abdulla TarmahomedDepartment of Paediatric Cardiology, Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Amer HarkyDepartment of Congenital Cardiac Surgery, Alder Hey Children Hospital, Liverpool, UK. amer.harky@lhch.nhs.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5507-5841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infective endocarditis is very uncommon in children; however, when it does arise, it can lead to severe consequences. The biggest risk factor for paediatric infective endocarditis today is underlying congenital heart defects. The most common causative organisms are Staphylococcus aureus and the viridans group of streptococci. The spectrum of symptoms varies widely in children and this produces difficulty in the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Infective endocarditis in children is reliant on the modified Duke criteria. The use of blood cultures remains the most effective microbiological test for pathogen identification. However, in blood culture-negative infective endocarditis, serology testing and IgG titres are more effective for diagnosis. Imaging techniques used include echocardiograms, computed tomography and positron emission tomography. Biomarkers utilised in diagnosis are C-reactive protein, with recent literature reviewing the use of interleukin-15 and C-C motif chemokine ligand for reliable risk prediction. The American Heart Association (AHA) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines have been compared to describe the differences in the approach to infective endocarditis in children. Medical intervention involves the use of antimicrobial treatment and surgical interventions include the repair and replacement of cardiac valves. Quality of life is highly likely to improve from surgical intervention.Conclusion: Over the past decades, there have been great advancements in clinical practice to improve outcomes in patients with infective endocarditis. Nonetheless, further work is required to better investigative and manage such high risk cohort. What is Known: • The current diagnostic techniques including 'Duke's criteria' for paediatric infective endocarditis diagnosis • The current management guidelines utilised for paediatric infective endocarditis What is New: • The long-term outcomes of patients that underwent medical and surgical intervention • The quality of life of paediatric patients that underwent medical and surgical intervention.

Indexed as

EndocarditisEndocarditis, BacterialStaphylococcal InfectionsChildHumansQuality of LifeStaphylococcus aureusUnited StatesCardiac valvesDuke’s criteriaEmpirical antibiotic therapyValve repairValve replacement

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.