Abstract:Abstract Background The 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria for IE were recently introduced to improve classification of IE for research and clinical purposes (Table 1). We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the new criteria with the 2000 modified Duke criteria, the 2015 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) criteria and a clinically adjudicated reference standard by a panel of international experts on IE.Table 1:Overview of changes in criteria from 2000 modified Duke to 2023 Duke-ISCVIDAdapted from: Fowler et al, Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2023 Methods The study population consisted of consecutively enrolled patients suspected to have IE and discussed by the IE team of the Amsterdam University Medical Center (AMC) between October 2016 and March 2021. A panel of international experts on IE assigned a final diagnosis, which served as the reference standard. We compared the definite classification of the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria against this reference standard. We also evaluated accuracy of the new criteria, excluding data obtained from cardiac surgery and pathology (“Clinical Criteria”). Lastly, we quantified the added value of the proposed changes to the criteria, and compared the 2023 Duke-ISCVID to previous criteria using the McNemar test. We performed sensitivity analyses in patients who underwent cardiac surgery and patients who underwent TEE. Results 595 patients with suspected IE were included, of whom 399 (67%) were adjudicated as having IE. 111 patients (19%) had prosthetic valve IE, 48 (8%) had cardiac implantable electronic device IE. The 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria were more sensitive than the modified Duke or ESC criteria (84.2 vs 74.9 vs 80%,respectively, p < 0.001 for ISCVID vs ESC criteria) without significant loss of specificity (Table 2). After excluding cardiac surgery/pathology results, the 2023 Duke-ISCVID Clinical Criteria also had significantly better sensitivity than the modified Duke and ESC criteria, again without losing specificity. The changes in the 'major microbiological' and 'imaging' criteria had the most impact (Figure 1). Findings were robust in sensitivity analyses (Table 3). When classifying ‘definite’ and ‘possible’ IE as a positive test, the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria had 99% sensitivity compared to the reference standard, but specificity decreased to 21%.Table 2:Diagnostic accuracy of modified Duke, ESC and Duke-ISCVID criteria Sensitivity and specificity are against the reference standard (adjudication panel). The Clinical Criteria classification is the Duke-ISCVID classification when results from surgery or post-mortem studies are not used to determine classification.Table 3:Sensitivity analyses of accuracy of Duke-ISCVID criteria In the Definite + Possible analysis, patients with possible IE according to the Duke-ISCVID criteria were also considered as having IE. All comparisons are against the reference standard (adjudication panel). Conclusion In this cohort, the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria represent a significant advance in the diagnostic classification of patients suspected of IE. Added value of new Duke-ISCVID criteria compared to modified Duke criteria Each point (red square for sensitivity, blue circle for specificity) provides the diagnostic accuracy measure for the 2000 modified Duke Criteria with addition of a specific change from the Duke-ISCVID criteria. The horizontal bars represent the 95% confidence interval for the point estimate. The top points represent the modified Duke criteria without addition, the bottom points are the complete Duke-ISCVID criteria. Disclosures Larry M. Baddour, MD, Boston Scientific: Advisor/Consultant|Roivant Sciences: Advisor/Consultant Arnold S. Bayer, MD, Akagera Medicines: Grant/Research Support|ContraFect Corporation: Grant/Research Support Emanuele Durante Mangoni, MD,, PhD, Advanz pharma: Advisor/Consultant|Advanz pharma: Grant/Research Support|Advanz pharma: Honoraria|Angelini: Grant/Research Support|Angelini: Honoraria|Genentech: Advisor/Consultant|Genentech: Board Member|Genentech: Honoraria|Infectopharm: Grant/Research Support|Menarini: Board Member|Menarini: Honoraria|Pfizer: Advisor/Consultant|Pfizer: Board Member|Pfizer: Grant/Research Support|Pfizer: Honoraria|Roche: Advisor/Consultant|Roche: Board Member|Roche: Honoraria Thomas L. Holland, MD, Aridis: Advisor/Consultant|Basilea Pharmaceutica: Advisor/Consultant|Karius: Advisor/Consultant|Lysovant: Advisor/Consultant Adolf W. Karchmer, MD, Karius: Grant/Research Support|Up To Date: Honoraria Vance G. Fowler, MD, MHS, Amphliphi Biosciences, Integrated Biotherapeutics; C3J, Armata, Valanbio; Akagera, Aridis, Roche, Astra Zeneca: Advisor/Consultant|Genentech, Regeneron, Deep Blue, Basilea, Janssen;: Grant/Research Support|Infectious Diseases Society of America: Honoraria|MedImmune, Allergan, Pfizer, Advanced Liquid Logics, Theravance, Novartis, Merck; Medical Biosurfaces; Locus; Affinergy; Contrafect; Karius;: Grant/Research Support|Novartis, Debiopharm, Genentech, Achaogen, Affinium, Medicines Co., MedImmune, Bayer, Basilea, Affinergy, Janssen, Contrafect, Regeneron, Destiny,: Advisor/Consultant|Sepsis diagnostic: Patent pending|UpToDate: Royalties|Valanbio and ArcBio: Stock Options

Lower specificity of the ESC2023 diagnostic criteria for infective endocarditis when spondylodiscitis is regarded as a vascular phenomenon

Evaluation of the 2023 Duke-ISCVID and 2023 Duke-ESC clinical criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis in a multicenter cohort of patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia

A clinical analysis of 51 cases of infective endocarditis

Infective endocarditis:a review of 28 cases

Performance of the 2023 Duke-ISCVID diagnostic criteria for infective endocarditis in relation to the modified Duke criteria and to clinical management- reanalysis of retrospective bacteremia cohorts

The effects of spondylodiscitis on the inflammation burden in infective endocarditis

Evaluation of the specificity of the 2023 Duke-International Society of Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases classification for infective endocarditis

Comparison of the 2015 and 2023 European Society of Cardiology versions of the Duke criteria among patients with suspected infective endocarditis

Evaluation of the specificity of the 2023 European Society of Cardiology classification for infective endocarditis

In Which Patients Does the 2023 Duke-ISCVID Criteria for Infective Endocarditis Increase the Diagnosis of "Definite Endocarditis"?-A Preliminary Analysis in the Prospectively Evaluated DERIVE Cohort

Make modern microbiology matter more in the 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis

Evaluation of the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria in a multicenter cohort of patients with suspected infective endocarditis

The impact of concomitant infective endocarditis in patients with spondylodiscitis and isolated spinal epidural empyema and the diagnostic accuracy of the modified duke criteria

Compared Performance of the 2023 Duke-International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases, the 2000 Modified Duke, and the 2015 ESC Criteria for the Diagnosis of Infective Endocarditis in a French Multicenter Prospective Cohort

Impact on Pathogen Spectrum and Patients

Evaluation of the HANDOC score and the 2023 ISCVID and ESC Duke clinical criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis among patients with streptococcal bacteremia

The [99mTc]Tc-HMPAO-labelled white blood cell SPECT/CT as a novel criterion for infective endocarditis diagnosis

External Validation of the 2023 Duke - International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases Diagnostic Criteria for Infective Endocarditis

Spondylodiscitis: A Diagnostic and Management Dilemma

963. External Validation of the 2023 Duke - International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) Diagnostic Criteria for Infective Endocarditis (IE)