Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38856806›Full record

ArticleInfection2024

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of aortic prosthetic valve endocarditis: comparison between transcatheter and surgical bioprostheses.

Adrián Jerónimo, Carmen Olmos, Pablo Zulet, Daniel Gómez-Ramírez, Manuel Anguita, Juan Carlos Castillo, Francesc Escrihuela-Vidal, Guillermo Cuervo, Jorge Calderón-Parra, Antonio Ramos and 8 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Infection, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

18 authors.

Adrián JerónimoInstituto Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos (IdISSC), Profesor Martín Lagos, s/n, Madrid, 28040, Spain.
Carmen OlmosInstituto Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos (IdISSC), Profesor Martín Lagos, s/n, Madrid, 28040, Spain. carmen.olmosblanco@gmail.com.
Pablo ZuletInstituto Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos (IdISSC), Profesor Martín Lagos, s/n, Madrid, 28040, Spain.
Daniel Gómez-RamírezInstituto Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos (IdISSC), Profesor Martín Lagos, s/n, Madrid, 28040, Spain.
Manuel AnguitaDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía. Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain.
Juan Carlos CastilloDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía. Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain.
Francesc Escrihuela-VidalDepartment of Infectious Diseases, IDIBELL (Institut d´Investigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge), Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Guillermo CuervoDepartment of Infectious Diseases, IDIBELL (Institut d´Investigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge), Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Jorge Calderón-ParraDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
Antonio RamosDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain.
Gonzalo CabezónDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Jesús Álvarez RodríguezDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Paloma PulidoDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
María de Miguel-ÁlavaDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Carmen SáezDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Javier LópezDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Isidre VilacostaInstituto Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Clínico San Carlos (IdISSC), Profesor Martín Lagos, s/n, Madrid, 28040, Spain.
J Alberto San RománDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMost data regarding infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) comes from TAVI registries, rather than IE dedicated cohorts. The objective of our study was to compare the clinical and microbiological profile, imaging features and outcomes of patients with IE after SAVR with a biological prosthetic valve (IE-SAVR) and IE after TAVI (IE-TAVI) from 6 centres with an Endocarditis Team (ET) and broad experience in IE.

methodsRetrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. From the time of first TAVI implantation in each centre to March 2021, all consecutive patients admitted for IE-SAVR or IE-TAVI were prospectively enrolled. Follow-up was monitored during admission and at 12 months after discharge.

results169 patients with IE-SAVR and 41 with IE-TAVI were analysed. Early episodes were more frequent among IE-TAVI. Clinical course during hospitalization was similar in both groups, except for a higher incidence of atrioventricular block in IE-SAVR. The most frequently causative microorganisms were S. epidermidis, Enterococcus spp. and S. aureus in both groups. Periannular complications were more frequent in IE-SAVR. Cardiac surgery was performed in 53.6% of IE-SAVR and 7.3% of IE-TAVI (p=0.001), despite up to 54.8% of IE-TAVI patients had an indication. No differences were observed about death during hospitalization (32.7% vs 35.0%), and at 1-year follow-up (41.8% vs 37.5%), regardless of whether the patient underwent surgery or not.

conclusionPatients with IE-TAVI had a higher incidence of early prosthetic valve IE. Compared to IE-SAVR, IE-TAVI patients underwent cardiac surgery much less frequently, despite having surgical indications. However, in-hospital and 1-year mortality rate was similar between both groups.

Indexed as

BioprosthesisHeart Valve ProsthesisProsthesis-Related InfectionsTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementAgedAged, 80 and overAortic ValveEndocarditisEndocarditis, BacterialFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBioprosthesisCardiac surgeryInfective endocarditisTAVITranscatheter

Identifiers

PMID38856806
PMCPMC11621159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.