Lauge Østergaard1, Nana Valeur2, Andrew Wang3, Henning Bundgaard1, Mohsin Aslam1, Gunnar Gislason4,5, Christian Torp-Pedersen6, Niels Eske Bruun4,6,7, Lars Søndergaard1, Lars Køber1, Emil Loldrup Fosbøl1. 1. Heart Center, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 8, KBH N, Denmark. 2. Department of Cardiology, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 4. Department of Cardiology, Roskilde University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark. 5. Department of Cardiovascular Epidemiology and Research, The Danish Heart Foundation, Copenhagen, Denmark. 6. Unit of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark. 7. Clinical Institute, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Abstract
AIMS: Stratification of patients at risk of infective endocarditis (IE) remains a cornerstone in guidance of prophylactic strategies of IE. However, little attention has been given to patients considered at moderate risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using Danish nationwide registries, we assessed the risk of IE in patients with aortic and mitral valve disorders, a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED), or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and compared these patient groups with (i) controls from the background population using risk-set matching and (ii) a high-risk population (prosthetic heart valve). Cumulative incidence plots and multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazard analysis were used to compare risk of IE between risk groups. We identified 83 453 patients with aortic or mitral valve disorder, 50 828 with a CIED, and 3620 with HCM. The cumulative risk of IE after 10 years was 0.9% in valve disorder, 1.3% in CIED, and 0.5% in HCM patients. Compared with the background population, valve disorder, CIED, and HCM carried a higher associated risk of IE, hazard ratio (HR) = 8.75 [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.36-12.02], HR = 6.63 (95% CI 4.41-9.96), and HR = 6.57 (95% CI 2.33-18.56), respectively. All three study groups were associated with a lower risk of IE compared with high-risk patients, HR = 0.27 (95% CI 0.23-0.32) for valve disorder, HR = 0.28 (95% CI 0.23-0.33) for CIED, and HR = 0.13 (95% CI 0.06-0.29) for HCM. CONCLUSIONS: Heart valve disorder, CIED, and patients with HCM were associated with a higher risk of IE compared with the background population but have a lower associated risk of IE compared with high-risk patients. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Stratification of patients at risk of infective endocarditis (IE) remains a cornerstone in guidance of prophylactic strategies of IE. However, little attention has been given to patients considered at moderate risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using Danish nationwide registries, we assessed the risk of IE in patients with aortic and mitral valve disorders, a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED), or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and compared these patient groups with (i) controls from the background population using risk-set matching and (ii) a high-risk population (prosthetic heart valve). Cumulative incidence plots and multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazard analysis were used to compare risk of IE between risk groups. We identified 83 453 patients with aortic or mitral valve disorder, 50 828 with a CIED, and 3620 with HCM. The cumulative risk of IE after 10 years was 0.9% in valve disorder, 1.3% in CIED, and 0.5% in HCM patients. Compared with the background population, valve disorder, CIED, and HCM carried a higher associated risk of IE, hazard ratio (HR) = 8.75 [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.36-12.02], HR = 6.63 (95% CI 4.41-9.96), and HR = 6.57 (95% CI 2.33-18.56), respectively. All three study groups were associated with a lower risk of IE compared with high-risk patients, HR = 0.27 (95% CI 0.23-0.32) for valve disorder, HR = 0.28 (95% CI 0.23-0.33) for CIED, and HR = 0.13 (95% CI 0.06-0.29) for HCM. CONCLUSIONS:Heart valve disorder, CIED, and patients with HCM were associated with a higher risk of IE compared with the background population but have a lower associated risk of IE compared with high-risk patients. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Eva Havers-Borgersen; Emil L Fosbøl; Jawad H Butt; Jeppe K Petersen; Andreas Dalsgaard; Frederik Kyhl; Morten Schou; Matthew Phelps; Kristian Kragholm; Gunnar H Gislason; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Lars Køber; Lauge Østergaard Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2020-11-06
Authors: Michael L Williams; Mathew P Doyle; Nicholas McNamara; Daniel Tardo; Manish Mathew; Benjamin Robinson Journal: Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis Date: 2021 Jan-Dec
Authors: Eva Havers-Borgersen; Jawad H Butt; Morten Smerup; Gunnar H Gislason; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Mathis Gröning; Michael Rahbek Schmidt; Lars Søndergaard; Lars Køber; Emil L Fosbøl Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2021-11-03 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Sandra Chamat-Hedemand; Niels Eske Bruun; Lauge Østergaard; Magnus Arpi; Emil Fosbøl; Jonas Boel; Louise Bruun Oestergaard; Trine K Lauridsen; Gunnar Gislason; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Anders Dahl Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Emily M Eichenberger; Michael Dagher; Matthew R Sinclair; Stacey A Maskarinec; Vance G Fowler; Jerome J Federspiel Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2021-06-20 Impact factor: 5.099
Authors: Simon Junghans; Sebastian V Rojas; Romy Skusa; Anja Püschel; Eberhard Grambow; Juliane Kohlen; Philipp Warnke; Jan Gummert; Justus Gross Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) Date: 2021-11-25