Aylin Shafiyi1, Nandan S Anavekar2,3, Abinash Virk1, M Rizwan Sohail1,2, Brian D Lahr4, Daniel C DeSimone1,2, Walter R Wilson1, Larry M Baddour1,2. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 4. Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines from the American Heart Association (AHA) recommend repeating transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in three to five days if there is high suspicion of IE despite an initial TEE that was negative. This recommendation, however, is based on limited published data. OBJECTIVES: This investigation attempts to identify specific factors that prompted repeat TEE and evaluate the yield of IE-related findings demonstrated by repeat TEE as compared to initial or prior TEE. METHODS: A retrospective cohort who had at least one repeat TEE during an index hospitalization or initial course of antimicrobial therapy for IE between January 2014 and September 2018. We assessed the impact of repeat TEE on IE diagnosis and patient management and included a comparative analysis of patients with initial TEE only. RESULTS: Overall, 59 (44.7%) of 132 IE patients underwent repeat TEE. In a comparative analysis that involved patients who had undergone an initial TEE only versus those who had repeat TEE, male gender (P = .029) and presence of a prosthetic valve or annuloplasty ring (P = .017) were significantly associated with repeat TEE. Importantly, 8 (17.4%) of repeat TEE were critical for IE diagnosis, 8 (17.4%) impacted antimicrobial management, and 11 (23.9%) supported cardiovascular surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: From a population-based cohort of incident IE cases, repeat TEE was more frequently (44.7%) done in patients with suspect or proven IE and associated complications than anticipated. Repeat TEE remains pivotal in a contemporary practice that involves critical aspects of IE diagnosis and management.
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines from the American Heart Association (AHA) recommend repeating transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in three to five days if there is high suspicion of IE despite an initial TEE that was negative. This recommendation, however, is based on limited published data. OBJECTIVES: This investigation attempts to identify specific factors that prompted repeat TEE and evaluate the yield of IE-related findings demonstrated by repeat TEE as compared to initial or prior TEE. METHODS: A retrospective cohort who had at least one repeat TEE during an index hospitalization or initial course of antimicrobial therapy for IE between January 2014 and September 2018. We assessed the impact of repeat TEE on IE diagnosis and patient management and included a comparative analysis of patients with initial TEE only. RESULTS: Overall, 59 (44.7%) of 132 IE patients underwent repeat TEE. In a comparative analysis that involved patients who had undergone an initial TEE only versus those who had repeat TEE, male gender (P = .029) and presence of a prosthetic valve or annuloplasty ring (P = .017) were significantly associated with repeat TEE. Importantly, 8 (17.4%) of repeat TEE were critical for IE diagnosis, 8 (17.4%) impacted antimicrobial management, and 11 (23.9%) supported cardiovascular surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: From a population-based cohort of incident IE cases, repeat TEE was more frequently (44.7%) done in patients with suspect or proven IE and associated complications than anticipated. Repeat TEE remains pivotal in a contemporary practice that involves critical aspects of IE diagnosis and management.
Authors: J S Li; D J Sexton; N Mick; R Nettles; V G Fowler; T Ryan; T Bashore; G R Corey Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2000-04-03 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Jason R Sims; Nandan S Anavekar; Krishnaswamy Chandrasekaran; James M Steckelberg; Walter R Wilson; Bernard J Gersh; Larry M Baddour; Daniel C DeSimone Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Walter A Rocca; Brandon R Grossardt; Scott M Brue; Cynthia M Bock-Goodner; Alanna M Chamberlain; Patrick M Wilson; Lila J Finney Rutten; Jennifer L St Sauver Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Srikanth Koneru; Steven S Huang; Jorge Oldan; Jorge Betancor; Zoran B Popovic; L Leonardo Rodriguez; Nabin K Shrestha; Steven Gordon; Gosta Pettersson; Michael A Bolen Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2018-08
Authors: Jesse Habets; Wilco Tanis; Johannes B Reitsma; Renee B A van den Brink; Willem P Th M Mali; Steven A J Chamuleau; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-02-14 Impact factor: 5.315