ArticleCardiology journal2023
Impact of the initial clinical presentation on the outcome of patients with infective endocarditis.
Article in Cardiology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Infective endocarditis complicated by shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Heart failure reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Predictors of In-Hospital Mortality From Infective Endocarditis in a Resource-Limited, War-Affected Tertiary Center.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Infective endocarditis in a Finnish tertiary care hospital: from etiology to embolic events.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Infective Endocarditis in Belgium: Prospective Data in Adults from the ESC EORP European Endocarditis Registry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Risk Factors Associated with Poor Outcome in Patients with Infective Endocarditis: An Italian Single-Center Experience.Infectious disease reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfective endocarditis (IE) is a life-threatening disease. Despite advancements in diagnostic methods, the initial clinical presentation of IE remains a valuable asset. Therefore, the impact of clinical presentation on outcomes and its association with microorganisms and IE localization were assessed herein.
methodsThis retrospective study included 183 patients (age 68.9 ± 14.2 years old, 68.9% men) with definite IE at two tertiary care hospitals in Belgium. Demographic data, medical history, clinical presentation, blood cultures, imaging data and outcomes were recorded.
resultsIn-hospital mortality rate was 22.4%. Sixty (32.8%) patients developed embolism, 42 (23%) shock, and 103 (56.3%) underwent surgery during hospitalization. Shock at admission predicted embolism during hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] 2.631, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.119-6.184, p = 0.027). A new cardiac murmur at admission predicted cardiac surgery (OR 1.949, 95% CI 1.007- -3.774, p = 0.048). Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus predicted in-hospital mortality and shock (p = 0.005, OR 6.945, 95% CI 1.774-27.192 and p = 0.015, OR 4.691, 95% CI 1.348-16.322, respectively). Mitral valve and aortic valve IE predicted in-hospital death (p = 0.039, OR 2.258, 95% CI 1.043-4.888) and embolism (p = 0.017, OR 2.328, 95% CI 1.163-4.659), respectively.
conclusionsIn this retrospective study, shock at admission independently predicted embolism during hospitalization in IE patients. Moreover, a new cardiac murmur at admission predicted the need for cardiac surgery. This emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive initial clinical evaluation in combination with imaging and microbiological data, in order to identify high-risk IE patients early.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.