Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 21405

AbstractCase ReportDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Case Series
Year : 2023 | Month : September | Volume : 17 | Issue : 9 | Page : OR01 - OR05 Full Version

Role of Early Mitral Valve Surgery in Acute Infective Endocarditis: A Case Series and Review of Literature


Published: September 1, 2023 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2023/63601.18404
Gunavathy Nagesh Jakaraddi, Nagesh D Jakaraddi

1. Professor, Department of Critical Care Medicine, SDM College of Medical Sciences and Hospital, Dharwad, Karnataka, India. 2. Professor, Department of Critical Care Medicine, SDM College of Medical Sciences and Hospital, Dharwad, Karnataka, India.

Correspondence Address :
Gunavathy Nagesh Jakaraddi,
No. 134, Saket Block, Ratnashri Vihar, SDM College Staff Quarters, SDM Dental College, Backside Sattur, Dharwad, Karnataka, India.
E-mail: gunavathy2010@gmail.com

Abstract

Infective Endocarditis (IE) is a serious cardiac infection diagnosed with syndromic approach based on clinical, immunological, sonographic, and microbiological findings. It is highly suspected in patients with pre-existing heart disease who have bacteremia in absence of other obvious source. Due to its non-specific symptoms and delayed diagnosis causes severe septicemia, multiple organ failure, and high mortality. This case series describes three critically ill patients who were diagnosed with active IE upon admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). All three patients were admitted in critical condition and were newly diagnosed with IE. They were initially stabilised with appropriate antibiotics. However, during their ICU stay, after two weeks, they experienced recurrent arrhythmias and severe Mitral Regurgitation (MR), complicating recurrent pulmonary oedema that hindered weaning from mechanical ventilation. Therefore, it was decided to perform Mitral Valve (MV) correction surgery during the acute phase of endocarditis (2 weeks after starting antibiotics). Unfortunately, all patients had in-hospital mortality. Intraoperative findings revealed extensive vegetation on the Anterior and Posterior Mitral Leaflet (AML and PML) with extension to the chordae. The high mortality was attributed to their critical pre-operative condition, septic shock, and cerebral embolism. Guidelines and task force management clearly state that early surgery plays a definitive role in acute endocarditis with complications. However, identifying the appropriate candidates for early surgery is challenging due to the associated high mortality. A database search on MV surgery in acute IE, comparing repair and replacement, has concluded that repair is safe and associated with better survival than replacement.

Keywords

Anti-bacterial agents, Arrhythmias, Bacterial endocarditis, Cardiac embolism, Intensive care units, Sepsis

Case Report

Case 1

A 50-year-old female patient presented with a history of paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnoea and breathlessness for the past 15 days. She was apparently fine 15 days ago and visited the outpatient department with the aforementioned symptoms. She had a known case of hypertension and end-stage renal disease, requiring haemodialysis for the last three months.

Her dialysis access consisted of a right internal jugular tunnel catheter in-situ, arteriovenous fistula. Physical examination revealed pallor, icterus, and pedal oedema. Bilateral rhonchi were noted. She was diagnosed with an infected permacath with sepsis and congestive cardiac failure. To maintain saturation, she required 4L of oxygen through a facemask. A two Dimensional (2D) echocardiogram showed a large vegetation in the anterior mitral leaflet. Appropriate antibiotics (Injection (Inj.) Vancomycin, Inj. Ceftazidime, and Inj. Amikacin) were initiated, and the tunnel catheter was removed. Chest X-ray (CXR) revealed features of pulmonary oedema (Table/Fig 1).

On the first day of ICU admission, the patient was in shock. Blood culture and sensitivity reported the growth of Enterococcus species and Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA). On the fourth day, there was worsening hypoxia necessitating mechanical ventilation. During her further hospital course, new-onset hypoxia (pulmonary oedema) with ventricular bigeminy rhythm/multiple ectopic beats interrupted weaning. Her cardiac enzymes were elevated (Troponin 78 ng/mL, pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptides (BNP) 35,000 ng/mL, myoglobin 1960 ng/mL). On day 10 of ICU stay, transthoracic echocardiography and Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE) confirmed persistent large vegetation on AML tip and severe MR (Table/Fig 2).

On the 13th day, the patient’s general condition worsened, and the CXR showed worsening bilateral lung infiltrates. She experienced arrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation) and required Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) for eight minutes with a defibrillator shock for VF rhythm. Post-return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC), the patient was conscious and obeying commands.

On the 14th day, after confirming normal coronaries, she underwent MV repair or replacement surgery depending on intraoperative findings how amenable is the valve reconstructive surgery. Intraoperative findings revealed a healthy aorta, dilated pulmonary artery, firm and dilated right atrium and ventricle, and a small left atrium. Vegetation measuring 25×10 mm was observed over the Anterior Mitral Leaflet (AML) body, and a 10×10 cm vegetation was noted over the PML noted. Subvalvular apparatus was destroyed, resulting in severe Mitral Regurgitation (MR). The decision was made to perform MV replacement with a bicor bio prosthesis. Post-operative Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE) showed satisfactory MV function.

On the 18th day, she was gradually weaned off and extubated, but she was re-intubated on the same day due to worsening respiratory distress and haemodynamics. She had a prolonged ICU stay with hospital-acquired infection, severe sepsis, and septic shock. On the 39th day, she was successfully weaned off the ventilator, and her pulmonary infiltrates showed improvement. However, five days later, she had increased Tracheostomy Tube (TT) secretions and increased Work Of Breathing (WOB). TT cultures were positive for Klebsiella and Pseudomonas, while blood culture was positive for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA). Appropriate sensitive antibiotics were started.

A follow-up Transthoracic Echocardiography (TTE) did not show the recurrence of endocarditis or any regurgitation. On the 52nd day, the patient developed worsened hypotension and rising lactate values. Screening echo revealed the presence of pericardial effusion with septations. Left intercostal drainage and pericardial drain were placed, and 300-400 mL of fluid was drained. Blood and blood products were transfused to optimise the coagulation parameters. Due to the prolonged ICU stay and hospital-acquired multidrug-resistant infection, she succumbed to the illness and was pronounced dead on the 68th day of hospital stay.

Case 2

A 71-year-old male patient with no co-morbidities presented with fever, cough and expectoration since four days, and complained of gradually worsening breathlessness for 15 days. On arrival, he was in an altered sensorium and in a hypoxic state, requiring endotracheal intubation.

Further work-up revealed bilateral pneumonia and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Computed Tomography (CT) brain confirmed bilateral multi-infarcts (Table/Fig 3)a, and CT abdomen (Table/Fig 3)b showed a splenic infarct with developing abscess (Table/Fig 3)b.

A 2D echocardiogram showed vegetation on the Anterior Mitral Leaflet (AML) and Posterior Mitral Leaflet (PML) with severe Mitral Regurgitation (MR). The patient was in shock and required vasopressors. Appropriate antibiotics (ceftriaxone, gentamicin, vancomycin) were administered, and blood cultures showed streptococcal infection. He received 14 days of antibiotics and showed improvement in shock and severe sepsis.

Due to the severe MR, the patient could not be weaned from mechanical ventilation and experienced recurrent pulmonary oedema. Follow-up 2D echo showed (Table/Fig 4) there was an increasing size of the vegetation. Hence, he was taken up for MVR of D14 (coronary angiogram was normal). Intraoperative findings revealed extensive vegetations on the AML and PML with extension to the chordae. MV replacement was done with TTK Chitra MV prosthesis, size 27. On the third postoperative day, he experienced sudden arrhythmias VT/VF and could not be revived.

Case 3

A 68-year-old male patient, known to have diabetes, hypertension, and chronic renal disease on maintenance haemodialysis for the past four months, presented to the emergency department with a history of irrelevant speech and breathlessness. MRI Brain (Table/Fig 5) revealed an ischemic stroke.

Upon arrival, he was intubated due to respiratory distress and required vasopressors to support his haemodynamics. A 2D echocardiogram showed vegetation attached to the Anterior Mitral Leaflet (AML) with adequate left ventricular function (Table/Fig 6) and severe Mitral Regurgitation (MR). Blood culture and haemodialysis line cultures were positive for enterococci. Hence, treated with antibiotics including meropenem, gentamicin, and teicoplanin. On the fourth day, he was successfully disconnected from artificial ventilation but experienced intermittent episodes of respiratory distress, requiring non-invasive ventilation. Daily haemodialysis was performed to remove fluids. Due to recurrent respiratory distress and persistent sepsis (high WBC count, thrombocytopenia with a platelet count of 61,000/cumm, high procalcitonin, and CRP) MV replacement done on day 21 of hospital stay. Unfortunately, on the fourth day postoperatively, he developed worsening shock and was pronounced dead.

Discussion

Infective Endocarditis (IE) is a serious, life-threatening disease with adverse complications (1). A systematic review of IE epidemiology from the GBD 2010 (Global Burden of Disease, Injuries, and Risk Factors) study estimated the crude incidence of native valve disease, as reported from 10 countries (USA, Australia, Africa, Europe), ranged from 1.5 to 11.6 cases per 100,000 people. In-hospital mortality of native valve IE is 22%, while the 5-year mortality rate is 40%. The systematic review aimed to assess epidemiology in various regions of the world. However, due to lack of information from low and middle-income regions, improved surveillance is required to assess the global burden (2). According to the results of the Global Burden of Disease IE Study 2019, the incidence of IE has increased 2.5 times from 1990 to 2019, and there has been a sharp rise in deaths over the past 30 years, from 28,750 in 1990 to 66,320 in 2019 (1).

Choudhury R et al., conducted a retrospective analysis of 186 patients with 190 episodes of IE over a 10-year duration. Rheumatic heart disease was the most frequent (42%) underlying cardiac condition (3). Garg N et al., also confirmed similar findings in their study of 192 patients, with 46% of cases attributed to rheumatic aetiology. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 25%, and higher neurological complications were observed in patients who died compared to those who recovered (4). Gupta A et al., reported similar findings in their study of 61 patients with IE, with 38% of cases attributed to rheumatic aetiology. Congestive heart failure was the most common complication (47%), followed by sepsis (21%) (5).

The evolving epidemiological profile and diverse nature continue to pose diagnostic challenges. The diagnosis is defined by the Dukes or modified Dukes criteria, which include microbiological, echocardiographic, fever, vascular phenomena, and immunologic phenomena (6).

The Euro Heart Survey of 2005 described the characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of active IE in Europe. The study included 159 patients, out of which 118 patients had heart failure (55%), embolism (31%), and fever more than 38 degrees Celsius (89%). Surgery was performed in over 50% of patients, with 12.5% undergoing surgery within the first 24 hours, 75% during the initial hospitalisation, and 12.5% electively. The reasons for surgery (native valve, n=62) were heart failure (58%), persistent sepsis (39%), followed by embolism (18%) (7).

In an Indian scenario, the clinical presentation and complications were not significantly different from those in the West or the developing world. However, there was a lower incidence of stroke compared to the Western report (7).

Surgery is indicated in patients with IE and heart failure caused by severe Mitral Regurgitation (MR), intra-cardiac fistula, or valve obstruction. Surgery may also be considered in patients without heart failure but with echocardiographic signs of elevated end-diastolic pressure, high left atrial pressure, or moderate to severe pulmonary hypertension (7). According to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines, surgery must be performed on an emergency basis regardless of the infection status when patients experience persistent pulmonary oedema or cardiogenic shock despite medical therapy. In cases of uncontrolled infection, indications for surgery include persistent fever (more than 10 days), perivalvular complications (such as abscess formation, pseudoaneurysm, and fistula), and persistent positive culture for several days (more than 7 to 10 days) despite appropriate antibiotic treatment. Perivalvular extension should be suspected in cases with persistent unexplained fever or new atrioventricular block, which warrants Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE) as the preferred diagnostic technique for perivalvular complications. The ESC recommends surgery for organisms that are difficult to treat, for example, MRSA or vancomycin-resistant enterococci, as well as gram-negative bacteria (8).

Embolic events are life-threatening complications, with an overall incidence of 20-50%. The brain and spleen are the most common sites for embolism in left-sided IE. The crucial part of predicting the risk of embolism in an individual remains challenging. The size (>10 mm), mobility of vegetation, and location of vegetation on the MV on echocardiography play a key role in predicting embolic events (9). Surgery undertaken for the prevention of embolism should be performed very early, within the first few days of antibiotic therapy (9).

To summarise, heart failure complicating IE requires emergency surgery (within 24 hours, level of evidence class 1B), regardless of the duration of antibiotic treatment. Uncontrolled infection with a high risk of embolism require urgent surgery (within a few days, level of evidence 1B) (8).

In the European Heart Survey, the commonly performed surgical techniques for left-sided single valve IE were valve replacement with mechanical prosthesis (63% of 118 patients), bioprosthesis in 21%, and valve repair in 11% (7). Surgical methods should be tailored to the individual patient and the clinical scenario. Valve repair is favoured in perforations, especially in mitral or tricuspid valve involvement, when the disease is confined to leaflet or valve cusps, although replacement can also be used. In cases of locally uncontrolled infection, valve replacement is performed after total excision of infected and devitalised tissue, with minimal use of foreign material. In the case of abscess, small ones can be closed directly, while large ones should be drained into the pericardium or circulation (8).

Guidelines and task force management clearly state the definitive role of early surgery in acute endocarditis with complications (heart failure, prevention of embolism, and uncontrolled infections). However, identifying the right patient for early surgery is difficult due to the associated high mortality. (Table/Fig 7) shows the findings of studies involving acute IE and MV surgery from January 2012 to March 2022 (10),(11),(12),(13),(14),(15),(16),(17),(18),(19),(20),(21),(22),(23). It’s important to note that some of these studies discussed only MV repair, accounting for the larger study population undergoing repair.

In a retrospective study by Gelsomino S et al., from Italy, 379 patients with acute MV endocarditis, with or without shock, were examined. The existing diagnostic difficulty in differentiating the type of shock, in multivariate logistic regression analysis, shows that septic shock is an independent predictor of mortality, with 3.8 times higher mortality than cardiogenic shock (11).

In active native MV endocarditis, consensus guidelines support surgical treatment with repair rather than replacement. Similar findings were observed by Toyoda N et al., who analysed 1,970 patients. Although 367 patients were in the repair group and 1,603 patients underwent replacement, there was an increasing trend towards the repair group, with better twelve-year survival and a lower recurrence rate in the repair group (16).

Tepsuwan T et al., conducted a retrospective study involving 114 patients and concluded that MV repair surgery has a better 5-year survival rate than MV replacement (91.6% vs. 70%, p=0.08) (20). Two retrospective studies involving 149 and 192 patients respectively concluded that an early and repair-oriented surgical approach results in good long-term durability of the repair and a very low recurrence rate of IE (18),(22). In a Spanish registry involving 437 patients, MV repair was deemed an attractive option for acute IE, and at one year, the replacement group had a higher mortality rate (3.7% vs. 2.9%) (23).

Although retrospective studies favour MV repair, our search criteria identified case reports with rare IE, the majority of which involved MV replacement. Indications for MV replacement include delayed diagnosis, degenerative valve, destroyed valve, mycotic aneurysm, and embolic events in IE and rare IE. The timing of surgery varied in the retrospective data and was around 1-2 weeks (9),(10),(15),(17),(18),(20),(21),(22),(23).

Conclusion

Due to the complexity of the disease and the varied clinical presentation, the primary objectives of surgery in endocarditis are source control and reconstruction of the valve. Based on early diagnosis and early surgery, observations in the present study favour MV repair surgeries in acute endocarditis. Although MV repair shows less morbidity and mortality compared to MV replacement, the surgical procedure and technique should be tailored to individual patients and the local invasion of the disease.

References

1.
Chen H, Zhan Y, Zhang K, Gao Y, Chen L, Zhan J, et al. The global, regional, and national burden and trends of infective endocarditis from 1990 to 2019: Results from the global burden of disease study 2019. Front Med. 2022;9:774224. Doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.774224. eCollection 2022. [crossref][PubMed]
2.
Bin Abdulhak AA, Baddour LM, Erwin PJ, Hoen B, Chu VH, Mensah GA, et al. Global and Regional Burden of Infective Endocarditis, 1990–2010: A systematic review of the literature. Global Heart. 2014;9(1):131-43. [crossref][PubMed]
3.
Choudhury R, Grover A, Varma J, Khattri HN, Anand IS, Bidwai PS, et al. Active infective endocarditis observed in an Indian hospital 1981-1991. Am J Cardiol. 1992;70(18):1453-58.[crossref][PubMed]
4.
Garg N, Kandpal B, Garg N, Tewari S, Kapoor A, Goel P, et al. Characteristics of infective endocarditis in a developing country-clinical profile and outcome in 192 Indian patients, 1992-2001. Int J Cardiol. 2005;98(2):253-60. [crossref][PubMed]
5.
Gupta A, Gupta A, Kaul U, Varma A. Infective endocarditis in an Indian setup: Are we entering the ‘modern’ era? Indian J Crit Care Med. 2013;17(3):140-47. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Durack DT, Lukes AS, Bright DK. New criteria for diagnosis of infective endocarditis: Utilization of specific echocardiographic findings. Duke Endocarditis Service. Am J Med. 1994;96(3):200-09. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Tornos P, Iung B, Permanyer-Miralda G, Baron G, Delahaye F, Gohlke-Bärwolf Ch, et al. Infective endocarditis in Europe: Lessons from the Euro heart survey. Heart. 2005;91(5):571-75. [crossref][PubMed]
8.
Habib G, Hoen B, Tornos P, Thuny F, Prendergast B, Vilacosta I, et al. ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. Guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infective endocarditis (new version 2009): The Task Force on the Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Infective Endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) and the International Society of Chemotherapy (ISC) for Infection and Cancer. Eur Heart J. 2009;30(19):2369-413. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Sanfilippo AJ, Picard MH, Newell JB, Rosas E, Davidoff R, Thomas JD, et al. Echocardiographic assessment of patients with infectious endocarditis: Prediction of risk for complications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;18(5):1191-99. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Kerchove L, Price J, Tamer S, Glineur D, Momeni M, Noirhomme P, et al. Extending the scope of mitral valve repair in active endocarditis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;143(4 Suppl):S91-95. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Gelsomino S, Maessen JG, van der Veen F, Livi U, Renzulli A, Lucà F, et al. Emergency surgery for native mitral valve endocarditis: The impact of septic and cardiogenic shock. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;93(5):1469-76. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Chang HW, Kim KH, Hwang HY, Kim JS. Role of mitral valve repair in infective endocarditis. J Heart Valve Dis. 2014;23(3):350-59.
13.
Wang TK, Oh T, Voss J, Gamble G, Kang N, Pemberton J. Valvular repair or replacement for mitral endocarditis: 7-year cohort study. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2014;22(8):919-26. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Miura T, Hamawaki M, Hazama S, Hashizume K, Ariyoshi T, Sumi M, et al. Outcome of surgical management for active mitral native valve infective endocarditis: A collective review of 57 patients. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;62(8):488-98. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Lee SJ, Yang HS, Kim JS, Shin JK, Son JS, Song MG, et al. Midterm results of mitral valve repair with lifting annuloplasty strip for acute phase infective endocarditis. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;10:139. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Toyoda N, Itagaki, Egorova NN, Tannous H, Anyanwu CA, Eshmawi AE, et al. Real world outcomes of surgery for native valve Mitral valve endocarditis. J Thoracic and Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;154(6):1906-12. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Tomsic A, Versteegh MIM, Ajmone Marsan N, van Brakel TJ, Klautz RJM, Palmen M. Early and late results of surgical treatment for isolated active native mitral valve infective endocarditis. Interact Cardio Vasc Thorac Surg. 2018;26(4):610-16. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Solari S, De Kerchove L, Tamer S, Aphram G, Baert J, Borsellino S, et al. Active infective mitral valve endocarditis: Is a repair-oriented surgery safe and durable? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;55(2):256-62. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
El Gabry M, Haidari Z, Mourad F, Nowak J, Tsagakis K, Thielmann M, et al. Outcomes of mitral valve repair in acute native mitral valve infective endocarditis. Interact Cardio Vasc Thorac Surg. 2019;29(6):823-29. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Tepsuwan T, Rimsukcharoenchai C, Tantraworasin A, Taksaudom N, Woragidpoonpol S, Chuaratanaphong S, et al. Comparison between mitral valve repair and replacement in active infective endocarditis. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;67(12):1030-37. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Cuerpo GP, Valerio M, Pedraz A, Rodríguez-Abella H, Mestres CA, Obrador EQ, et al. Mitral valve repair in infective endocarditis is not inferior to valve replacement: Results from a Spanish nationwide prospective registry. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;67(7):585-93 [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Defauw RJ, Tomsic A, van Brakel TJ, Marsan NA, Klautz RJM, Palmen M. A structured approach to native mitral valve infective endocarditis: Is repair better than replacement? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;58(3):544-50. [crossref][PubMed]
23.
Roberts WC, Salam YM, Roberts CS. morphologic findings in native mitral valves replaced for isolated acute infective endocarditis. Am J Cardiol. 2022;162:136- 42. Doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2021.08.053.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/63601.18404

Date of Submission: Feb 25, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Jun 21, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Jul 17, 2023
Date of Publishing: Sep 01, 2023

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Mar 03, 2023
• Manual Googling: Jun 24, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Jul 12, 2023 (9%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 6

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com