Back To Search Results

Aortic Valve Endocarditis Surgical Treatment

Editor: Nauman Khalid Updated: 10/28/2024 10:11:15 PM

Introduction

Infective endocarditis (IE) is an infectious disease that primarily affects the endocardial surface of the heart, with the heart valves being the most common targets and the mural endocardium less frequently involved.[1][2] Classified as acute, subacute, or chronic depending on symptom onset and duration, IE remains a significant public health concern. In 2019, the global incidence of IE was estimated at 13.8 cases per 100,000 people annually, contributing to 66,300 deaths worldwide. The disease burden amounts to 1723.59 disability-adjusted life years and 0.87 deaths per 100,000 population—ongoing research has centered on identifying the most effective prevention strategies.[3]

Over the past few decades, the incidence of IE has risen in the United States and globally, with Staphylococcus aureus now the predominant causative organism. Despite optimal medical management, mortality remains unacceptably high, prompting a focus on early recognition and intervention. Surgical management becomes critical for patients not responsive to medical therapy or those with complications, emphasizing the need for timely decision-making.

IE of the aortic valve poses unique surgical challenges and is associated with high rates of mortality and complications, particularly in cases complicated by annular abscesses. The incidence of aortic valve endocarditis complicated by annular abscess ranges from 12% to 50%, and its presence is a strong predictor of short-term mortality—reported to be nearly twice as high compared to patients without abscesses.[4] Furthermore, the likelihood of recurrent endocarditis significantly increases in those with annular abscess formation.[5] Complete surgical debridement and abscess removal are critical to minimizing recurrence risk; this approach often results in tissue deficiencies, necessitating advanced reconstructive techniques like annular patch reconstruction to support prosthetic valve placement.[6] Additional strategies have been proposed to reduce recurrence rates further and enhance outcomes, such as using local antibiotics within the residual abscess cavity.[7] 

Etiology

Register For Free And Read The Full Article
Get the answers you need instantly with the StatPearls Clinical Decision Support tool. StatPearls spent the last decade developing the largest and most updated Point-of Care resource ever developed. Earn CME/CE by searching and reading articles.
  • Dropdown arrow Search engine and full access to all medical articles
  • Dropdown arrow 10 free questions in your specialty
  • Dropdown arrow Free CME/CE Activities
  • Dropdown arrow Free daily question in your email
  • Dropdown arrow Save favorite articles to your dashboard
  • Dropdown arrow Emails offering discounts

Learn more about a Subscription to StatPearls Point-of-Care

Etiology

For native valve endocarditis and IE, the most common microorganisms are Streptococcus viridans and S aureus.[1] For prosthetic valve endocarditis in the early phase (less than 2 months), typical agents include coagulase-negative staphylococci, Staphylococcus epidermidis (30%-35%), and S aureus (20%-24%). In the late phase (more than 12 months), the typical etiologic agents are S viridans and S aureus.[1] For acute bacterial endocarditis, the most common agent is S aureus, whereas for subacute bacterial endocarditis, the most common agent is Streptococcus mutans.

Candidal infectious endocarditis usually presents in patients with prosthetic valves, those who use intravenous drugs, and immunocompromised individuals.[1] Gastrointestinal or genitourinary manipulation is a risk factor for Streptococcus bovis or enterococcal IE. Poor dental hygiene risks streptococci and the HACEK group agents (Haemophilus, Aggregatibacter [previously Actinobacillus], Cardiobacterium, Eikenella, Kingella). In contrast, nosocomial agents include S aureus, gram-negative agents, and Candida spp. 

Epidemiology

Epidemiological studies indicate that the profile of IE has shifted significantly worldwide. S aureus has emerged as the most common causative organism, supplanting previously predominant pathogens. Additionally, the demographic and clinical characteristics of affected patients have evolved, with an increased mean age, a higher proportion of prosthetic valve infections, and a greater number of surgeries performed for IE management.[8] There has also been a noticeable rise in IE incidence following minimally invasive aortic valve surgeries and percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedures, highlighting the need for vigilant postprocedural monitoring and tailored management strategies.[9][10]

Pathophysiology

IE of the aortic valve is a life-threatening condition caused by microorganisms, most commonly bacteria, colonizing and subsequently infecting the valvular endocardial surface. The pathophysiology of aortic valve endocarditis involves a complex interplay between endothelial injury, microbial adherence, immune response, and structural damage.

Endothelial Injury and Microbial Adherence

Endothelial injury, often caused by turbulent blood flow from congenital or acquired valve abnormalities such as a bicuspid aortic valve, aortic stenosis, or insufficiency, exposes the subendothelial collagen and tissue factor. This injury initiates the formation of a nonbacterial thrombotic endocardial lesion, which consists of fibrin and platelets. These lesions provide an ideal site for bacterial adhesion. Bacteremia, often resulting from dental, surgical, or other invasive procedures, allows circulating pathogens, particularly S aureus, S viridans, or enterococci, to attach to the nonbacterial thrombotic endocardial lesion.

Colonization and Vegetation Formation

Once adhered, bacteria become encased in a fibrin and platelet matrix, forming vegetations. This environment shields the bacteria from immune surveillance and antibiotics, making the infection more difficult to eradicate. In aortic valve endocarditis, vegetation typically forms on the aortic side of the valve leaflets. As the vegetation grows, it can cause mechanical destruction of the valve, leading to aortic regurgitation or stenosis, further compromising hemodynamic function.

Immune Response and Tissue Damage

The host immune response to infection exacerbates the damage. Neutrophils and macrophages release inflammatory cytokines and proteolytic enzymes, contributing to local tissue destruction and weakening of the aortic valve. Over time, the infection may extend beyond the valve leaflets to the adjacent myocardium and aortic root, leading to complications such as ring abscesses, perivalvular leaks, or fistulae between cardiac chambers or the aorta.

Complications and Embolization

The vegetations can embolize, particularly in cases of large, friable vegetations, leading to systemic embolic events such as stroke, myocardial infarction, or embolism to peripheral organs (eg, kidneys, spleen). Additionally, severe aortic regurgitation due to valve destruction can cause acute heart failure, which is a frequent indication for urgent surgical intervention.

History and Physical

IE remains challenging to diagnose due to its diverse clinical presentations. Consideration should be given to IE in any patient with sepsis or an unexplained fever, particularly when risk factors are present. Manifestations can vary widely, appearing as an acute, rapidly progressing infection or a subacute or chronic condition with mild or absent fever and vague symptoms, complicating the initial diagnosis. Furthermore, IE may present with complications that mimic various medical conditions, including rheumatologic, neurological, and autoimmune disorders or even malignancies. These diverse presentations can lead to evaluations for other diseases before arriving at an IE diagnosis. Maintaining a high level of suspicion for IE is crucial, especially when fever and positive blood cultures are present without a clear source of infection. Early involvement of a multidisciplinary endocarditis team is strongly recommended to guide disease management.

Data from the European Infective Endocarditis Registry reveal that the most common clinical signs of IE include fever (77.7%), heart murmur (64.5%), and heart failure (27.2%).[11] Embolic complications were present in 25.3% of patients, while cardiac conduction abnormalities were found in 11.5%.[4] Although classic peripheral stigmata, such as splinter hemorrhages and Osler nodes, are less frequently seen today, they may still occur in severe infections caused by S aureus or subacute IE, typically due to Streptococcus spp. Vascular and immunological manifestations, such as Roth spots and glomerulonephritis, remain common.[12]

Atypical presentations are more frequent in elderly or immunocompromised individuals, necessitating a high index of suspicion and a low threshold for testing to rule out IE, especially in high-risk groups like those with congenital heart disease or prosthetic valves.[13] Educating these patients about their risk and the symptoms of IE is crucial so they can seek timely advice from specialized centers.[14] The most common symptoms include fever, anorexia, weight loss, malaise, and night sweats.[1] Physical examination findings often reveal a murmur, petechiae on the skin, oral mucosa or conjunctivae, and splenomegaly.[1] Peripheral findings of IE include splinter hemorrhages, usually seen under the fingernails or toenails, as well as Osler nodes and Janeway lesions.[1]

Evaluation

The diagnosis of IE is primarily based on clinical suspicion, supported by microbiological evidence and imaging that confirms cardiac lesions related to IE. A critical diagnostic criterion is detecting the involvement of the heart valves (native or prosthetic) or intracardiac prosthetic material. Echocardiography is the preferred initial imaging method. However, additional techniques such as computed tomography (CT) scans, positron emission tomography (PET), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are increasingly incorporated into the diagnostic approach due to their ability to confirm IE, evaluate local complications, detect distant lesions, and trace the source of bacteremia in patients with secondary IE. Moreover, imaging findings play a crucial role in determining prognosis.[15]

The classification of IE is based on the Modified Duke Criteria, which provides a structured framework for evaluating patients suspected of having IE. The criteria classify cases into 3 categories: definite, possible, and rejected.[16] Definite IE can be further subdivided into 2 types:

  • Definite IE by pathological criteria
    • Definite IE by pathological criteria is confirmed when microorganisms are identified in an excised vegetation or an abscess specimen or if histological evidence shows active endocarditis within the vegetation or abscess. 
  • Definite IE by clinical criteria
    • Definite IE by clinical criteria is met when 2 major criteria, 1 major criterion plus 3 minor criteria, or 5 minor criteria are fulfilled according to the Modified Duke Criteria.[16][17][18]
      • The primary clinical criteria include:
        • Multiple positive blood cultures
        • A single positive culture for Coxiella burnetii
        • Evidence of endocardial involvement, such as new valvular regurgitation or echocardiographic findings of vegetation, abscess, or dehiscence [18]
      • Minor clinical criteria encompass the following:
        • Predisposing heart conditions or intravenous drug use
        • Fever greater than 38 °C (100.4 °F)
        • Vascular phenomena like arterial emboli, septic pulmonary infarcts, or Janeway lesions
        • Immunologic phenomena such as Osler nodes, Roth spots, or rheumatoid factor
        • Positive blood cultures that do not meet the significance criteria [18]

Possible IE is diagnosed when 1 major criterion and 1 minor criterion, or 3 minor criteria, are present.[16] Rejected IE is defined when an alternative diagnosis is more likely, there is no pathological evidence of IE after less than 4 days of antibiotic therapy, or clinical symptoms resolve within 4 days of antibiotic therapy.[16] The echocardiographic criteria for IE include an oscillating intracardiac mass on valves or supporting structures in the path of regurgitant jets, an abscess, or partial prosthetic valve dehiscence.[16] A transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) should be corroborated by a transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) to evaluate suspected IE comprehensively. In cases where no definitive diagnosis is established until surgery, tissue specimens should be obtained for histological analysis to confirm the presence of endocarditis.

Advanced imaging modalities, such as CT, MRI, and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT), are highly recommended in patients with suspected or confirmed IE due to their ability to provide comprehensive diagnostic information. Cardiac CT is particularly valuable for diagnosing IE and its cardiac complications, including perivalvular and periprosthetic abscesses, pseudoaneurysms, and fistulas. Study results indicate that cardiac CT offers superior accuracy compared to TEE in detecting these complications, especially in cases of native valve endocarditis and prosthetic valve endocarditis when TEE is inconclusive or not feasible. Cardiac CT is also crucial in guiding surgical decisions, offering detailed anatomical views that inform the extent of surgical resection or reconstruction needed.[19]

Whole-body and brain CT are essential tools for detecting distant lesions and sources of bacteremia. These imaging studies allow clinicians to identify systemic complications of IE, such as septic emboli, which serve as minor diagnostic criteria and can contribute to establishing a definitive diagnosis or excluding IE. Furthermore, MRI is indispensable in detecting neurological complications and spinal lesions related to IE. The high-resolution imaging capability of MRI makes it ideal for evaluating ischemic or hemorrhagic strokes, which are often observed in patients with IE with septic embolization to the brain.[20]

Integrating PET-CT with CT angiography (PET/CTA) provides a novel approach for assessing IE's metabolic activity and anatomical abnormalities. The combination of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 uptake measurement with anatomical visualization enables the detection of active infection sites and distant embolic events, aiding in the management of complex cases, such as those with congenital heart disease or aortic grafts. This multimodal imaging approach improves diagnostic precision and influences therapeutic strategies, ultimately optimizing patient outcomes.[21]

Treatment / Management

Management of IE primarily involves prolonged courses of bactericidal antibiotics. The choice of regimen, whether single or combination therapy and the duration of treatment (ranging from 2 to 6 weeks) depend on the pathogen’s susceptibility and resistance profile and whether the patient has native or prosthetic valve endocarditis. Treatment typically begins in the hospital and is often completed on an outpatient basis once the patient is afebrile and blood cultures are negative. However, antibiotic therapy may not be sufficient for all cases. Surgery becomes necessary under Class I indications, which include valvular dysfunction leading to heart failure, left-sided IE caused by S aureus, fungal or resistant microorganisms, conduction abnormalities such as heart block, annular or abscess formation, or persistent infection after 5 to 7 days of antibiotic therapy.[2](B3)

Surgical management of IE focuses on aggressive debridement of all infected and necrotic tissue, followed by reconstructive surgery. Intraoperative TEE is a Class I recommendation for evaluating the extent of damage.[2] With some exceptions, median sternotomy is also a Class I recommendation.[2] Surgical access to the aortic valve is typically achieved through a low transverse or oblique aortotomy. For native valve IE, the goal is to eradicate infected tissue and repair or replace the valve. Repair should be prioritized when infection is limited to the valve leaflets or cusps (Class I).[2] In cases requiring replacement, valve selection—whether mechanical or bioprosthetic—follows standard criteria (Class I), except in patients with contraindications such as intracranial hemorrhage or stroke (Class IIa).[2](B3)

For native aortic valve endocarditis involving the annulus, radical resection of infected tissue is crucial, followed by reconstructive surgery. Small to moderate defects may be repaired with autologous or bovine pericardial patches, while larger defects necessitate a Dacron patch.[22] An aortic homograft is preferred if more than 50% of the annulus is affected.[23] Aortic root abscess presents a significant challenge due to the extensive damage it can inflict on nearby structures, including the fibrous trigones, interventricular septum, atria, and pulmonary artery.[22] The severity of the infection often necessitates complete replacement of the aortic root, coupled with reimplantation of the coronary arteries to restore functionality. In cases where intervalvular fibrosis is present, an aortic homograft is the preferred treatment option, offering a favorable outcome in complex reconstructions where standard prosthetic valves might not suffice.[24] This approach helps manage the infection while addressing the structural damage caused by the abscess. For prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis that spares the aortic root and annulus after radical resection, implanting a new prosthetic valve (tissue or mechanical) is reasonable (Class IIa).[2] However, with the destruction of the annulus or if the infection has spread beyond the aortic root, reconstruction and using an allograft or a biologic tissue root is preferable to a prosthetic valved conduit (Class IIa).[2](B3)

Annular abscesses are a serious complication of aortic valve endocarditis, occurring in 12% to 50% of cases and doubling short-term mortality rates. Recurrence of IE is also more frequent in patients with annular abscesses.[4] As such, eradicating the infection through radical surgical debridement followed by patch reconstruction is critical. While local antibiotics have been proposed to reduce the risk of recurrence, the likelihood of residual disease is low following complete surgical abscess removal. However, mixing antibiotics with fibrin glue in the remaining abscess cavity may only offer temporary protection, and the glue could hinder antibiotic penetration into surrounding tissues, reducing the treatment's effectiveness. Although local antibiotic application has successfully prevented sternal wound infections, developing antibiotic-eluting or bacteria-resistant patches and valve prostheses may offer a more robust solution to prevent recurrent endocarditis in this high-risk group.[25]

Differential Diagnosis

Differential diagnoses for aortic valve endocarditis include:

  • Nonbacterial thrombotic endocarditis
    • Marantic endocarditis causes small sterile vegetations on the valve leaflets and is linked to hypercoagulable states and some malignancies.
  • Libman–Sacks endocarditis
    • This condition causes verrucous vegetations and is associated with systemic lupus erythematosus.
  • Vasculitis
  • Connective tissue disease
  • Fever of unknown origin

Prognosis

The prognosis of IE is influenced by a myriad of factors, making it a challenging disease to manage and treat effectively. In-hospital mortality for IE has remained relatively stable over the past 2 decades, ranging from 15% to 30%, and various patient characteristics have been identified as contributing factors to this elevated risk of death. The overall in-hospital mortality is around 20%, whereas the 6-month mortality is approximately 30%, underscoring the fatal nature of this condition.[26] The virulence of the causative organism, complications, patient comorbidities, and the timing of medical or surgical interventions largely determine prognostic outcomes.

Causative organisms such as S aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterobacteriaceae, and fungi are associated with significantly higher mortality rates. Certain patient-specific factors also contribute to a poorer prognosis, including advanced age, prosthetic valve endocarditis, hemodialysis, severe heart failure, stroke, the presence of an intracardiac abscess, severe immunosuppression (eg, human immunodeficiency virus infection), or perivalvular extension with myocardial abscess formation.[1][26] Prosthetic valve endocarditis carries a worse prognosis compared to native valve endocarditis due to the increased risk of perivalvular complications and prosthetic valve dehiscence. Conversely, right-sided IE in intravenous drug users typically has a lower mortality rate, around 10%, reflecting the less complex nature of the disease in this subgroup.[27]

Despite technological advances in diagnostic imaging, antimicrobial therapy, and surgical techniques, the mortality rate for IE has not significantly decreased. This persistence is attributed to multiple factors, including the increasing age of affected patients, the higher prevalence of comorbid conditions, changing epidemiological trends, and the emergence of more resistant pathogens.[1][26] Nosocomial infections, often caused by multi-drug resistant organisms, now represent a greater proportion of IE cases, especially in developed countries. Additionally, the need for complex interventions in high-risk populations can contribute to elevated perioperative mortality and morbidity. Early recognition of high-risk individuals could provide opportunities for timely interventions, such as urgent or emergency surgery, which may improve overall outcomes and long-term prognosis.[4]

Complications

Cardiac complications include congestive heart failure caused by valvular damage from the infection, annular abscess, the extension of infection into the conduction system leading to atrioventricular blocks, mycotic aneurysms of the sinus of Valsalva, which can result in pericarditis, hemopericardium, and cardiac tamponade, or fistulas to the cardiac chambers including the right or left ventricle.[1] Neurologic complications include thromboembolic events and mycotic aneurysms from septic embolization of vegetations; these aneurysms can rupture and cause intracranial hemorrhage and sudden death.[1] Other complications include systemic embolism to the end organs, including the liver, the lungs, the kidneys, and the spleen.[1] 

Deterrence and Patient Education

Preventing IE relies on more than just antibiotic prophylaxis. Individuals at risk should be educated on the importance of maintaining proper dental and skin hygiene, recognizing signs of infection, and informing their healthcare provider about their risk if they experience an unexplained fever. In such cases, clinicians should consider screening for IE before starting antibiotic treatment. To enhance patient understanding, using simple language, visual aids, digital resources, repetition, and the teach-back method is highly recommended. National cardiology societies are encouraged to create specific IE awareness cards to educate patients.[28] Early recognition and diagnosis of IE are imperative to ensure timely management and optimal clinical outcomes. Identifying patients who are surgical candidates is essential, as early surgical intervention is associated with lower mortality.[29]

Pearls and Other Issues

Key insights for aortic valve endocarditis include:

  • IE predominantly affects men around the age of 60.
  • There is a higher prevalence of prosthetic valve IE, cardiovascular device-related IE, nosocomial infections, and those caused by Staphylococcus and Enterococcus species.
  • Oral streptococcal endocarditis remains less common, and its incidence has not risen following the 2009 and 2015 guidelines limiting antibiotic prophylaxis use.
  • Advanced imaging techniques, such as fluorodeoxyglucose F 18-PET-CT, have gained global usage in diagnosing IE.
  • The use of mechanical valve replacements is declining, while mitral valve repair remains underutilized in IE cases.
  • Despite advancements, the prognosis for IE remains poor, highlighting the need for more aggressive treatment approaches.

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a serious condition with a grave prognosis. Despite technological advances over the past few decades, which have helped improve the diagnosis and management of IE, its mortality remains high. Results from several observational studies have highlighted the critical role of a dedicated endocarditis team in improving the diagnosis, management, and clinical outcomes of patients with IE.[30][31] As the European Society of Cardiology and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association recommended, multidisciplinary endocarditis teams have led to more timely and accurate diagnoses of the disease and its complications, consistent antibiotic therapy, and better surgical intervention timing.[32][33]

A multidisciplinary approach is essential given the varied clinical presentations of IE, which depend on patient characteristics and the microorganism's virulence. The endocarditis team must be flexible, adapting to the patient's specific clinical needs and local epidemiology to ensure efficient diagnosis and treatment. The endocarditis team should comprise specialists directly involved in the diagnosis and treatment, with the composition varying based on the type of healthcare facility. Key members of the team include cardiologists and surgeons experienced in cardiovascular implanted electronic device extraction, heart failure, and congenital heart disease. Additional essential team members include pathologists, critical care specialists, cardiac anesthesiologists, interventional cardiologists, neurologists, neurosurgeons, pharmacologists, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, nephrologists, and geriatricians. Multidisciplinary addiction medicine teams—composed of psychiatrists, nurses, and social workers—are also vital for counseling and should be available for consultation.[6]

References


[1]

Mylonakis E, Calderwood SB. Infective endocarditis in adults. The New England journal of medicine. 2001 Nov 1:345(18):1318-30     [PubMed PMID: 11794152]


[2]

AATS Surgical Treatment of Infective Endocarditis Consensus Guidelines Writing Committee Chairs, Pettersson GB, Coselli JS, Writing Committee, Pettersson GB, Coselli JS, Hussain ST, Griffin B, Blackstone EH, Gordon SM, LeMaire SA, Woc-Colburn LE. 2016 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) consensus guidelines: Surgical treatment of infective endocarditis: Executive summary. The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. 2017 Jun:153(6):1241-1258.e29. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.09.093. Epub 2017 Jan 24     [PubMed PMID: 28365016]

Level 3 (low-level) evidence

[3]

Momtazmanesh S, Saeedi Moghaddam S, Malakan Rad E, Azadnajafabad S, Ebrahimi N, Mohammadi E, Rouhifard M, Rezaei N, Masinaei M, Rezaei N, Keykhaei M, Aminorroaya A, Ghamari A, Larijani B, Farzadfar F. Global, regional, and national burden and quality of care index of endocarditis: the global burden of disease study 1990-2019. European journal of preventive cardiology. 2022 May 27:29(8):1287-1297. doi: 10.1093/eurjpc/zwab211. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 34897404]

Level 2 (mid-level) evidence

[4]

Habib G, Erba PA, Iung B, Donal E, Cosyns B, Laroche C, Popescu BA, Prendergast B, Tornos P, Sadeghpour A, Oliver L, Vaskelyte JJ, Sow R, Axler O, Maggioni AP, Lancellotti P, EURO-ENDO Investigators. Clinical presentation, aetiology and outcome of infective endocarditis. Results of the ESC-EORP EURO-ENDO (European infective endocarditis) registry: a prospective cohort study. European heart journal. 2019 Oct 14:40(39):3222-3232. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz620. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 31504413]


[5]

Haidari Z, Ahmad SU, Knipp S, Turaev I, El Gabry M. Aortic Valve Infective Endocarditis Complicated by Annular Abscess: Antibiotics in the Abscess Cavity. Journal of cardiovascular development and disease. 2024 Jun 24:11(7):. doi: 10.3390/jcdd11070189. Epub 2024 Jun 24     [PubMed PMID: 39057612]


[6]

Delgado V, Ajmone Marsan N, de Waha S, Bonaros N, Brida M, Burri H, Caselli S, Doenst T, Ederhy S, Erba PA, Foldager D, Fosbøl EL, Kovac J, Mestres CA, Miller OI, Miro JM, Pazdernik M, Pizzi MN, Quintana E, Rasmussen TB, Ristić AD, Rodés-Cabau J, Sionis A, Zühlke LJ, Borger MA, ESC Scientific Document Group. 2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of endocarditis. European heart journal. 2023 Oct 14:44(39):3948-4042. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad193. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 37622656]

Level 3 (low-level) evidence

[7]

McGiffin DC, Davies JE, Kirklin JK. Reconstructing the infected aortic root with antibiotic impregnated biological glue. Journal of cardiac surgery. 2014 May:29(3):340-2. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12292. Epub 2014 Jan 17     [PubMed PMID: 24433228]


[8]

Baddour LM, Wilson WR, Bayer AS, Fowler VG Jr, Tleyjeh IM, Rybak MJ, Barsic B, Lockhart PB, Gewitz MH, Levison ME, Bolger AF, Steckelberg JM, Baltimore RS, Fink AM, O'Gara P, Taubert KA, American Heart Association Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, and Stroke Council. Infective Endocarditis in Adults: Diagnosis, Antimicrobial Therapy, and Management of Complications: A Scientific Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2015 Oct 13:132(15):1435-86. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000296. Epub 2015 Sep 15     [PubMed PMID: 26373316]


[9]

Goyal A, Chhabra L, Parekh A, Bhyan P, Khalid N. Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Surgery. StatPearls. 2024 Jan:():     [PubMed PMID: 29261951]


[10]

Regueiro A, Linke A, Latib A, Ihlemann N, Urena M, Walther T, Husser O, Herrmann HC, Nombela-Franco L, Cheema AN, Le Breton H, Stortecky S, Kapadia S, Bartorelli AL, Sinning JM, Amat-Santos I, Munoz-Garcia A, Lerakis S, Gutiérrez-Ibanes E, Abdel-Wahab M, Tchetche D, Testa L, Eltchaninoff H, Livi U, Castillo JC, Jilaihawi H, Webb JG, Barbanti M, Kodali S, de Brito FS Jr, Ribeiro HB, Miceli A, Fiorina C, Dato GM, Rosato F, Serra V, Masson JB, Wijeysundera HC, Mangione JA, Ferreira MC, Lima VC, Carvalho LA, Abizaid A, Marino MA, Esteves V, Andrea JC, Giannini F, Messika-Zeitoun D, Himbert D, Kim WK, Pellegrini C, Auffret V, Nietlispach F, Pilgrim T, Durand E, Lisko J, Makkar RR, Lemos PA, Leon MB, Puri R, San Roman A, Vahanian A, Søndergaard L, Mangner N, Rodés-Cabau J. Association Between Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Subsequent Infective Endocarditis and In-Hospital Death. JAMA. 2016 Sep 13:316(10):1083-92. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.12347. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 27623462]


[11]

Habib G, Lancellotti P, Erba PA, Sadeghpour A, Meshaal M, Sambola A, Furnaz S, Citro R, Ternacle J, Donal E, Cosyns B, Popescu B, Iung B, Prendergast B, Laroche C, Tornos P, Pazdernik M, Maggioni A, Gale CP, EURO-ENDO Investigators. The ESC-EORP EURO-ENDO (European Infective Endocarditis) registry. European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes. 2019 Jul 1:5(3):202-207. doi: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcz018. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 30957862]

Level 2 (mid-level) evidence

[12]

Schwiebert R, Baig W, Wu J, Sandoe JAT. Diagnostic accuracy of splinter haemorrhages in patients referred for suspected infective endocarditis. Heart (British Cardiac Society). 2022 Jul 16:():. pii: heartjnl-2022-321052. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321052. Epub 2022 Jul 16     [PubMed PMID: 35842232]


[13]

Grable C, Yusuf SW, Song J, Viola GM, Ulhaq O, Banchs J, Jensen CT, Goel H, Hassan SA. Characteristics of infective endocarditis in a cancer population. Open heart. 2021 Aug:8(2):. doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2021-001664. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 34344722]


[14]

N'Guyen Y, Duval X, Revest M, Saada M, Erpelding ML, Selton-Suty C, Bouchiat C, Delahaye F, Chirouze C, Alla F, Strady C, Hoen B, AEPEI study group. Time interval between infective endocarditis first symptoms and diagnosis: relationship to infective endocarditis characteristics, microorganisms and prognosis. Annals of medicine. 2017 Mar:49(2):117-125. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2016.1235282. Epub 2016 Nov 3     [PubMed PMID: 27607562]


[15]

Erba PA, Lancellotti P, Vilacosta I, Gaemperli O, Rouzet F, Hacker M, Signore A, Slart RHJA, Habib G. Recommendations on nuclear and multimodality imaging in IE and CIED infections. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2018 Sep:45(10):1795-1815. doi: 10.1007/s00259-018-4025-0. Epub 2018 May 24     [PubMed PMID: 29799067]


[16]

Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP 3rd, Guyton RA, O'Gara PT, Ruiz CE, Skubas NJ, Sorajja P, Sundt TM 3rd, Thomas JD, Anderson JL, Halperin JL, Albert NM, Bozkurt B, Brindis RG, Creager MA, Curtis LH, DeMets D, Guyton RA, Hochman JS, Kovacs RJ, Ohman EM, Pressler SJ, Sellke FW, Shen WK, Stevenson WG, Yancy CW, American College of Cardiology, American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, American Heart Association. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. 2014 Jul:148(1):e1-e132. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.05.014. Epub 2014 May 9     [PubMed PMID: 24939033]

Level 1 (high-level) evidence

[17]

Durack DT, Lukes AS, Bright DK. New criteria for diagnosis of infective endocarditis: utilization of specific echocardiographic findings. Duke Endocarditis Service. The American journal of medicine. 1994 Mar:96(3):200-9     [PubMed PMID: 8154507]

Level 3 (low-level) evidence

[18]

Li JS, Sexton DJ, Mick N, Nettles R, Fowler VG Jr, Ryan T, Bashore T, Corey GR. Proposed modifications to the Duke criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2000 Apr:30(4):633-8     [PubMed PMID: 10770721]


[19]

Oliveira M, Guittet L, Hamon M, Hamon M. Comparative Value of Cardiac CT and Transesophageal Echocardiography in Infective Endocarditis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging. 2020 Jun:2(3):e190189. doi: 10.1148/ryct.2020190189. Epub 2020 Jun 18     [PubMed PMID: 33778583]

Level 1 (high-level) evidence

[20]

El Ouazzani J, Jandou I, Christophe Thuaire I. Thrombus or vegetation?Importance of cardiac MRI as a diagnostic tool based on case report and literature review. Annals of medicine and surgery (2012). 2020 Dec:60():690-694. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2020.12.007. Epub 2020 Dec 5     [PubMed PMID: 33318794]

Level 3 (low-level) evidence

[21]

Pizzi MN, Roque A, Fernández-Hidalgo N, Cuéllar-Calabria H, Ferreira-González I, Gonzàlez-Alujas MT, Oristrell G, Gracia-Sánchez L, González JJ, Rodríguez-Palomares J, Galiñanes M, Maisterra-Santos O, Garcia-Dorado D, Castell-Conesa J, Almirante B, Aguadé-Bruix S, Tornos P. Improving the Diagnosis of Infective Endocarditis in Prosthetic Valves and Intracardiac Devices With 18F-Fluordeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Angiography: Initial Results at an Infective Endocarditis Referral Center. Circulation. 2015 Sep 22:132(12):1113-26. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.015316. Epub 2015 Aug 14     [PubMed PMID: 26276890]


[22]

d'Udekem Y, David TE, Feindel CM, Armstrong S, Sun Z. Long-term results of operation for paravalvular abscess. The Annals of thoracic surgery. 1996 Jul:62(1):48-53     [PubMed PMID: 8678685]


[23]

Yankah AC, Pasic M, Klose H, Siniawski H, Weng Y, Hetzer R. Homograft reconstruction of the aortic root for endocarditis with periannular abscess: a 17-year study. European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery. 2005 Jul:28(1):69-75     [PubMed PMID: 15982588]


[24]

Knosalla C, Weng Y, Yankah AC, Siniawski H, Hofmeister J, Hammerschmidt R, Loebe M, Hetzer R. Surgical treatment of active infective aortic valve endocarditis with associated periannular abscess--11 year results. European heart journal. 2000 Mar:21(6):490-7     [PubMed PMID: 10681490]


[25]

Andreas M, Muckenhuber M, Hutschala D, Kocher A, Thalhammer F, Vogt P, Fleck T, Laufer G. Direct sternal administration of Vancomycin and Gentamicin during closure prevents wound infection. Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery. 2017 Jul 1:25(1):6-11. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivx032. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 28402472]


[26]

Wang A, Gaca JG, Chu VH. Management Considerations in Infective Endocarditis: A Review. JAMA. 2018 Jul 3:320(1):72-83. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.7596. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 29971402]


[27]

Hecht SR, Berger M. Right-sided endocarditis in intravenous drug users. Prognostic features in 102 episodes. Annals of internal medicine. 1992 Oct 1:117(7):560-6     [PubMed PMID: 1524330]

Level 2 (mid-level) evidence

[28]

Friedman AJ, Cosby R, Boyko S, Hatton-Bauer J, Turnbull G. Effective teaching strategies and methods of delivery for patient education: a systematic review and practice guideline recommendations. Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education. 2011 Mar:26(1):12-21. doi: 10.1007/s13187-010-0183-x. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 21161465]

Level 1 (high-level) evidence

[29]

Park LP, Chu VH, Peterson G, Skoutelis A, Lejko-Zupa T, Bouza E, Tattevin P, Habib G, Tan R, Gonzalez J, Altclas J, Edathodu J, Fortes CQ, Siciliano RF, Pachirat O, Kanj S, Wang A, International Collaboration on Endocarditis (ICE) Investigators. Validated Risk Score for Predicting 6-Month Mortality in Infective Endocarditis. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2016 Apr 18:5(4):e003016. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.003016. Epub 2016 Apr 18     [PubMed PMID: 27091179]


[30]

Okura T, Iwata K, Koyama T, Ebisawa K, Arakawa Y, Kusuki M, Ohji G. Impact of Infectious Disease Consultation on Management and Outcomes of Infective Endocarditis. The Annals of thoracic surgery. 2021 Oct:112(4):1228-1234. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.09.044. Epub 2020 Nov 26     [PubMed PMID: 33248990]


[31]

El-Dalati S, Cronin D, Riddell J 4th, Shea M, Weinberg RL, Washer L, Stoneman E, Perry DA, Bradley S, Burke J, Murali S, Fagan C, Chanderraj R, Christine P, Patel T, Ressler K, Fukuhara S, Romano M, Yang B, Deeb GM. The Clinical Impact of Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Endocarditis Team. The Annals of thoracic surgery. 2022 Jan:113(1):118-124. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.02.027. Epub 2021 Mar 1     [PubMed PMID: 33662308]


[32]

Blomström-Lundqvist C, Traykov V, Erba PA, Burri H, Nielsen JC, Bongiorni MG, Poole J, Boriani G, Costa R, Deharo JC, Epstein LM, Saghy L, Snygg-Martin U, Starck C, Tascini C, Strathmore N, ESC Scientific Document Group. European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) international consensus document on how to prevent, diagnose, and treat cardiac implantable electronic device infections-endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 2020 Apr 1:22(4):515-549. doi: 10.1093/europace/euz246. Epub     [PubMed PMID: 31702000]

Level 3 (low-level) evidence

[33]

Mori M, Brown KJ, Bin Mahmood SU, Geirsson A, Mangi AA. Trends in Infective Endocarditis Hospitalizations, Characteristics, and Valve Operations in Patients With Opioid Use Disorders in the United States: 2005-2014. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2020 Mar 17:9(6):e012465. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.012465. Epub 2020 Mar 15     [PubMed PMID: 32172645]