• Non ci sono risultati.

Several factors worsen the prognosis of IE and early surgical intervention may be necessary [2]

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Condividi "Several factors worsen the prognosis of IE and early surgical intervention may be necessary [2]"

Copied!
2
0
0

Testo completo

(1)

CHAPTER 8

Prognosis

The determinants of early and late survival in patients with IE have been identified [1]. Several factors worsen the prognosis of IE and early surgical intervention may be necessary [2].

Clinical factors include old age, the presence of heart failure, renal failure, neurological symptoms, systemic em- boli, and delay in diagnosis. Persistent fever beyond the first week of treatment often indicates the development of complications such as progressive valve destruction, extension of infection to the valve’s annulus, develop- ment of perivalvular abscess, or the presence of septic emboli.

Bacteriological factors include the causative organism, with a worse prognosis in the case of Staphylococcus aureus, certain Gram-negative aerobic bacilli, and fungi. These of- ten present as acute IE and produce severe intracardiac de- struction and major embolic complications. Early surgical intervention is frequently required and the mortality rate is>20% [3].

Echocardiographic factors include aortic valve endo- carditis, PVE, and ring abscesses when persisting infection is more likely and surgery often inevitable [4]. The presence of recent, large (>10 mm), very mobile, pedunculated veg- etations increases the risk of systemic embolization, which may significantly affect prognosis.

The cure rate for NVE is>90% for streptococci, 75–

90% for enterococci, and 60–75% for S. aureus [5–8].The usual causes of death are heart failure, emboli, rupture of mycotic aneurysms, postoperative complications, re- nal failure, and overwhelming infection. The prognosis is worse in PVE than in NVE, and on rare occasions only heart transplantation can resolve intractable infection on

prosthetic valves [9]. Late prosthetic valve endocarditis has a better prognosis than early prosthetic valve endocarditis, with mortality rates of 19–50% and 41–80% respectively [10–15]. Valvular dysfunction, dehiscence, and intracar- diac abscesses are commoner in early infection and the antibiotic-resistant organisms associated with early dis- ease contribute to the higher mortality.

In 1995, Delahaye et al reported on the long-term prog- nosis of IE [16].In their series (1970–1986), global survival was 75% at 6 months and 57% at 5 years, with the annual instantaneous risk of death being 0.55 at 6 months, 0.18 at 1 year, then 0.03. After 1 year, the only factor influencing prognosis was age. The risk of recurrence appears to be 0.3–2.5/100 patient-years [16,17].

Castillo et al (1987–1997) reported a 5-year survival of 71% [18].In NVE, 5-year survival has been reported to be 88–96%, in contrast to PVE where 5-year survival rate is 60–82% [18–20]. Late PVE may have 5-year survival rates of 80–82% [18,21].

Netzer et al [22] reported that long-term survival fol- lowing IE is 50% after 10 years and is predicted by early surgical treatment, age<55 years, lack of congestive heart failure, and the initial presence of more symptoms of IE.

The long-term results of multivalvular surgery for IE have been recently reported [23].

REFERENCES

1. Aranki SF, Adams DH, Rizzo RJ, et al. Determinants of early mortality and late survival in mitral valve endocarditis. Circu- lation 1995;92:143–149.

137

(2)

138 Color Atlas of Infective Endocarditis

2. Mansur AJ, Grinberg M, Cardoso RH, et al. Determinants of prognosis in 300 episodes of infective endocarditis. Thorac Car- diovasc Surg 1996;44:2–10.

3. Espersen F, Frimodt-Moller N. Staphylococcus aureus endocardi- tis. A review of 119 cases. Arch Intern Med 1986;146:1118–

1121.

4. Rohmann S, Erbel R, Mohr-Kahaly S, Meyer J. Use of transoesophageal echocardiography in the diagnosis of ab- scess in infective endocarditis. Eur Heart J 1995;16(Suppl B):

54–62.

5. Bisno AL, Dismukes WE, Durack DT, et al. Antimicrobial treat- ment of infective endocarditis due to viridans streptococci, en- terococci and staphylococci. JAMA 1989;261:1471–1477.

6. Wilson WR, Geraci JE. Treatment of streptococcal infective en- docarditis. Am J Med 1985;78(Suppl 6B):128–137.

7. Faville RJ Jr, Zaske DE, Kaplan EL, et al. Staphylococcus aureus en- docarditis: combined therapy with vancomycin and rifampicin.

JAMA 1978;240:1963–1965.

8. Malquarti V, Saradarian W, Etienne J, et al. Prognosis of native valve infective endocarditis. A review of 253 cases. Eur Heart J 1984;5(Suppl C)11–20.

9. DiSesa VJ, Sloss LJ, Cohn LH. Heart transplantation for in- tractable prosthetic valve endocarditis. J Heart Transplant 1990;9:142–143.

10. Cowgill LD, Addonizio VP, Hopeman AR, Harken AH. Pros- thetic valve endocarditis. Curr Probl Cardiol 1986;11:617–

664.

11. Brottier E, Gin H, Brottier L, et al. Prosthetic valve endocardi- tis: diagnosis and prognosis. Eur Heart J 1984;5(Suppl C)123–

127.

12. Cowgill LD, Addonizio VP, Hopeman AR, Harken AH. A practi- cal approach to prosthetic valve endocarditis. Ann Thorac Surg 1987;43:450–457.

13. Leport C, Vilde JL, Bricaire F, et al. Fifty cases of late prosthetic valve endocarditis: improvement in prognosis over a 15 year period. Br Heart J 1987;58:66–71.

14. Dismukes WE. Prosthetic valve endocarditis. Factors influenc- ing outcome and recommendations for therapy. In: Bisno AL, ed. Treatment of Infective Endocarditis. New York: Grune &

Stratton; 1981:167–191.

15. Bayliss R, Clark C, Oakley CM, et al. Incidence, mortality and prevention of infective endocarditis. J R Coll Physicians 1986;20:15–20.

16. Delahaye F, Ecochard R, de Gevigney G, et al. The long-term prognosis of infective endocarditis. Eur Heart J 1995;16(Suppl B):48–53.

17. Renzulli A, Carozza A, Romano G, et al. Recurrent infective endocarditis: a multivariate analysis of 21 years of experience.

Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:39–43.

18. Castillo JC, Anguita MP, Ramirez A, et al. Long-term outcome of infective endocarditis in patients who were not drug addicts:

a 10 year study. Heart 2000;83:525–530.

19. Tornos MP, Permanyer-Miralda G, Olona M, et al. Long term complications of native valve infective endocarditis in non ad- dicts. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:567–572.

20. Calderwood SP, Swinsky LA, Karchmer AW, et al. Prosthetic valve endocarditis. Analysis of factors affecting outcome of therapy.

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1986;92:776–783.

21. Tornos P, Almirante B, Olona M, et al. Clinical outcome and long-term prognosis of late prosthetic valve endocarditis: a 20- year experience. Clin Infect Dis 1997;24:381–386.

22. Netzer ROM, Altwegg SC, Zollinger E, et al. Infective endocardi- tis: determinants of long term outcome. Heart 2002;88:61–66.

23. Mihaljevic T, Byrne JG, Cohn LH, Aranki SF. Long-term results of multivalvar surgery for infective multivalve endocarditis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:842–846.

Riferimenti

Documenti correlati

Our results are in accordance with the only other article assessing the role of obesity and overweight on survival after pulmonary metastasectomy [ 6 ]: the authors analyzed

We performed a field experiment using cage enclosures to test the effects of species richness, identity and density of gastropod grazers on the photosynthetic efficiency and biomass

This work is organized as follows: “ Data: drainage networks ” section describes the drainage data used and the image extraction procedure; “ Method: Deep Learning approach ”

Ruzzene, Edge waves in plates with resonators: an elastic analogue of the quantum valley hall effect, New Journal of Physics 19, 025001 (2017). Semperlotti, Tunable acoustic

The resulting scheme provides an extension to relativistic and non-relativistic MHD, that can be used to compute the evolution of the total radiation energy density and its

Chi sa quanto tempo anche la sinfonia, di cui oggi parliamo, sarebbe rimasta coperta di polvere e nell’oscurità, s’io non mi fossi tosto inteso con Ferdinand Schubert d’inviarla a

if, given a scale of values and a narrative situation, the course of action selected by the participants matched the course of action generated by the model (Question 1); second,