Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis

Purpose: The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. Methods: Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015. Patients were stratified into three age groups:<65 years, 65 to 80 years, and = 80 years.The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of the CCI to predict mortality risk. Results: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327 < 65 years;1291 65-80 years;502 = 80 years) were enrolled.Fever and heart failure were the most common presentations of IE, with no differences among age groups.Patients =80 years who underwent surgery were significantly lower compared with other age groups (14.3%, 65 years; 20.5%, 65-79 years; 31.3%, =80 years). In-hospital mortality was lower in the <65-year group (20.3%, <65 years;30.1%, 65-79 years;34.7%, =80 years;p < 0.001) as well as 1-year mortality (3.2%, <65 years; 5.5%, 65-80 years;7.6%, =80 years; p = 0.003).Independent predictors of mortality were age = 80 years (hazard ratio [HR]:2.78;95% confidence interval [CI]:2.32–3.34), CCI = 3 (HR:1.62; 95% CI:1.39–1.88), and non-performed surgery (HR:1.64;95% CI:11.16–1.58).When the three age groups were compared, the AUROC curve for CCI was significantly larger for patients aged <65 years(p < 0.001) for both in-hospital and 1-year mortality. Conclusion: There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age = 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI), and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in the <65-year group

Efficacy and safety of fosfomycin plus imipenem versus vancomycin for complicated bacteraemia and endocarditis due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a randomized clinical trial

FOSIMI Investigators.This work was supported by the Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo of Spain (Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain, Grant #EC0800190). JMP received a “Rio Hortega” Research Grant (CM14/00135; 2015-16) from Instituto de Salud Carlos III and the Ministerio de Economia and Competitividad, Madrid (Spain) and the ESCMID/FEMS Research Fellowship 2016. JMM received a personal 80:20 research grant from the Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain, during 2017–19

Addition of Gentamicin or Rifampin Does Not Enhance the Effectiveness of Daptomycin in Treatment of Experimental Endocarditis Due to Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus▿

This study evaluated the activity of daptomycin combined with either gentamicin or rifampin against three methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) clinical isolates in vitro and one isolate in vivo against a representative strain (MRSA-572). Time-kill experiments showed that daptomycin was bactericidal against these strains at concentrations over the MIC. Daptomycin at sub-MIC concentrations plus gentamicin at 1× and 2× the MIC yielded synergy, while the addition of rifampin at 2 to 4 μg/ml resulted in indifference (two strains) or antagonism (one strain). The in vivo activity of daptomycin (6 mg/kg of body weight once a day) was evaluated ± gentamicin (1 mg/kg intravenously [i.v.] every 8 h [q8h]) or rifampin (300 mg i.v. q8h) in a rabbit model of infective endocarditis by simulating human pharmacokinetics. Daptomycin plus gentamicin (median, 0 [interquartile range, 0 to 2] log10 CFU/g vegetation) was as effective as daptomycin alone (0 [0 to 2] log10 CFU/g vegetation) in reducing the density of bacteria in valve vegetations (P = 0.83), and both were more effective than daptomycin plus rifampin (3 [2 to 3.5] log10 CFU/g vegetation; P < 0.05) for the strain studied. In addition, daptomycin sterilized a ratio of vegetations that was similar to that of daptomycin plus gentamicin (10/15 [67%] versus 9/15 [60%]; P = 0.7), and both regimens did so more than daptomycin plus rifampin (3/15 [20%]; P = 0.01 and P = 0.02, respectively). No statistical difference was noted between daptomycin plus gentamicin and daptomycin alone for MRSA treatment. In the combination arm, all isolates from vegetations remained susceptible to daptomycin, gentamicin, and rifampin. Sixty-one percent of the isolates (8/13) acquired resistance to rifampin during monotherapy. In the daptomycin arm, resistance was detected in only one case, in which the daptomycin MIC rose to 2 μg/ml among the recovered bacteria. In conclusion, the addition of gentamicin or rifampin does not enhance the effectiveness of daptomycin in the treatment of experimental endocarditis due to MRSA

Fosfomycin plus β-Lactams as Synergistic Bactericidal Combinations for Experimental Endocarditis Due to Methicillin-Resistant and Glycopeptide-Intermediate Staphylococcus aureus.

The urgent need of effective therapies for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infective endocarditis (IE) is a cause of concern. We aimed to ascertain the in vitro and in vivo activity of the older antibiotic fosfomycin combined with different beta-lactams against MRSA and glycopeptide-intermediate-resistant S. aureus (GISA) strains. Time-kill tests with 10 isolates showed that fosfomycin plus imipenem (FOF+IPM) was the most active evaluated combination. In an aortic valve IE model with two strains (MRSA-277H and GISA-ATCC 700788), the following intravenous regimens were compared: fosfomycin (2 g every 8 h [q8h]) plus imipenem (1 g q6h) or ceftriaxone (2 g q12h) (FOF+CRO) and vancomycin at a standard dose (VAN-SD) (1 g q12h) and a high dose (VAN-HD) (1 g q6h). Whereas a significant reduction of MRSA-227H load in the vegetations (veg) was observed with FOF+IPM compared with VAN-SD (0 [interquartile range [IQR], 0 to 1] versus 2 [IQR, 0 to 5.1] log CFU/g veg; P = 0.01), no statistical differences were found with VAN-HD. In addition, FOF+IPM sterilized more vegetations than VAN-SD (11/15 [73%] versus 5/16 [31%]; P = 0.02). The GISA-ATCC 700788 load in the vegetations was significantly lower after FOF+IPM or FOF+CRO treatment than with VAN-SD (2 [IQR, 0 to 2] and 0 [IQR, 0 to 2] versus 6.5 [IQR, 2 to 6.9] log CFU/g veg; P &lt; 0.01). The number of sterilized vegetations after treatment with FOF+CRO was higher than after treatment with VAN-SD or VAN-HD (8/15 [53%] versus 4/20 [20%] or 4/20 [20%]; P = 0.03). To assess the effect of FOF+IPM on penicillin binding protein (PBP) synthesis, molecular studies were performed, with results showing that FOF+IPM treatment significantly decreased PBP1, PBP2 (but not PBP2a), and PBP3 synthesis. These results allow clinicians to consider the use of FOF+IPM or FOF+CRO to treat MRSA or GISA IE