Duke Infective Endocarditis Criteria 3.0 for the Clinician: Defining What Is Possible

Henry F Chambers,ShanShan Zhang,Scott Evans

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae037

IF: 20.999

2024-02-09

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:This commentary summarizes the results and clinical implications of validation studies evaluating the performance of the 2023 Duke-ISCID criteria for infective endocarditis.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

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

Thomas W van der Vaart,Patrick M M Bossuyt,David T Durack,Larry M Baddour,Arnold S Bayer,Emanuele Durante-Mangoni,Thomas L Holland,Adolf W Karchmer,Jose M Miro,Philippe Moreillon,Magnus Rasmussen,Christine Selton-Suty,Vance G Fowler,Jan T M van der Meer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae033

IF: 20.999

2024-02-09

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Introduction The 2023 Duke-International Society of Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) Criteria for IE were introduced to improve classification of infective endocarditis (IE) for research and clinical purposes. External validation studies are required. Methods We studied consecutive patients with suspected IE referred to the IE Team of Amsterdam University Medical Center (October 2016-March 2021). An international expert panel independently reviewed case summaries, and assigned a final diagnosis of "IE" or "Not IE" , which served as the reference standard, to which the "Definite" Duke-ISCVID classifications were compared. We also evaluated accuracy when excluding cardiac surgery and pathology data ("Clinical Criteria"). Lastly, we compared the 2023 Duke-ISCVID to the 2000 Modified Duke Criteria and the 2015 and 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Criteria. Results 595 consecutive patients with suspected IE were included: 399 (67%) were adjudicated as IE; 111 (19%) had prosthetic valve IE and 48 (8%) had cardiac implantable electronic device IE. The 2023 Duke-ISCVID Criteria were more sensitive than either the Modified Duke or 2015 ESC Criteria (84.2% vs 74.9% and 80% respectively, p < 0.001) without significant loss of specificity. The 2023 Duke-ISCVID Criteria were similarly sensitive but more specific than the 2023 ESC Criteria (94% vs 82%, p <0.001). The same pattern was seen for the Clinical Criteria (excluding surgery/pathology results). New modifications in the 2023 Duke-ISCVID Criteria related to 'Major Microbiological' and 'Imaging' criteria were most impactful. Conclusion The 2023 Duke-ISCVID Criteria represent a significant advance in the diagnostic classification of patients with suspected IE.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
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

Kirsten Schmidt-Hellerau,Johannes Camp,Philipp Alexander Marmulla,Siegbert Rieg,Norma Jung,DESTINi (German Network for Clinical Studies in Infectious Diseases)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13164721

2024-08-12

Abstract:Background/Objectives: Recently, an update of the Duke criteria for the diagnosis of infectious endocarditis has been published: the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria. To gain an insight into which proportion of patients are affected by the new criteria, and which criteria might be the most relevant for the expected increase in sensitivity, we analysed data from a registry of cardiovascular infections. Methods: The 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria were applied to patients who were diagnosed with and treated for endocarditis after having been classified as "possible" endocarditis according to the 2015 ESC Modified Duke criteria. In patients thus newly classified as "definite endocarditis", diagnostic factors leading to this reclassification were described. Results: Of 397 patients, 48 (12%) did not fulfil the definition "definite infectious endocarditis" according to the 2015 ESC Modified Duke criteria. Of these, six (13%) fulfilled the definition when the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria were applied. A main factor triggering this reclassification was the consideration of microorganisms identified using valve PCR. Conclusions: As expected, the sensitivity of the new 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria is increased in this cohort, mainly through the incorporation of new diagnostic methods in the criteria. Further studies are required to assess the effect on specificity in detail.
Evaluation of the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria for infective endocarditis in patients referred to the Lund infective endocarditis team

Nils Avogadri,Alex Ivarsson,Charlotte Burup Kristensen,Sigurdur Ragnarsson,Magnus Rasmussen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23744235.2024.2402374

2024-09-15

Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Background The Duke criteria for diagnosing infective endocarditis (IE) were recently updated by the International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) with the purpose of enhancing diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. This study investigated the performance of the Duke-ISCVID criteria in relation to previous criteria.

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

Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris,Pierre Monney,Michelle Frank,Georgios Tzimas,Piergiorgio Tozzi,Matthias Kirsch,Mathias Van Hemelrijck,Robert Bauernschmitt,Jana Epprecht,Benoit Guery,Barbara Hasse

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae039

IF: 20.999

2024-02-09

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Background Since publication of Duke criteria for infective endocarditis (IE) diagnosis, several modifications have been proposed. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the Duke-ISCVID 2023 criteria compared to prior versions from 2000 (Duke-Li 2000) and 2015 (Duke-ESC 2015). Methods This study was conducted at two University Hospitals between 2014-2022 among patients with suspected IE. A case was classified as IE (final IE diagnosis) by the Endocarditis Team. Sensitivity for each version of the Duke criteria was calculated among patients with confirmed IE based on pathological, surgical and microbiological data. Specificity for each version of the Duke criteria was calculated among patients with suspected IE for whom IE diagnosis was ruled out. Results In total 2132 episodes with suspected IE were included; of which 1101 (52%) had final IE diagnosis. Definite IE by pathologic criteria was found in 285 (13%), 285 (13%), and 345 (16%) patients using the Duke-Li 2000, Duke-ESC 2015 or the Duke-ISCVID 2023 criteria, respectively. IE was excluded by histopathology in 25 (1%) patients. The Duke-ISCVID 2023 clinical criteria showed a higher sensitivity (84%) compared to previous versions (70%). However, specificity of the new clinical criteria was lower (60%) compared to previous versions (74%). Conclusions The Duke-ISCVID 2023 criteria led to an increase in sensitivity compared to previous versions. Further studies are needed to evaluate items that could increase sensitivity by reducing the number of IE patients misclassified as possible, but without having detrimental effect on specificity of Duke criteria.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
The 2023 Duke-International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases Criteria for Infective Endocarditis: Updating the Modified Duke Criteria

Vance G Fowler,David T Durack,Christine Selton-Suty,Eugene Athan,Arnold S Bayer,Anna Lisa Chamis,Anders Dahl,Louis DiBernardo,Emanuele Durante-Mangoni,Xavier Duval,Claudio Querido Fortes,Emil Fosbøl,Margaret M Hannan,Barbara Hasse,Bruno Hoen,Adolf W Karchmer,Carlos A Mestres,Cathy A Petti,María Nazarena Pizzi,Stephen D Preston,Albert Roque,Francois Vandenesch,Jan T M van der Meer,Thomas W van der Vaart,Jose M Miro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciad271

2023-08-22

Abstract:The microbiology, epidemiology, diagnostics, and treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) have changed significantly since the Duke Criteria were published in 1994 and modified in 2000. The International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) convened a multidisciplinary Working Group to update the diagnostic criteria for IE. The resulting 2023 Duke-ISCVID IE Criteria propose significant changes, including new microbiology diagnostics (enzyme immunoassay for Bartonella species, polymerase chain reaction, amplicon/metagenomic sequencing, in situ hybridization), imaging (positron emission computed tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, cardiac computed tomography), and inclusion of intraoperative inspection as a new Major Clinical Criterion. The list of "typical" microorganisms causing IE was expanded and includes pathogens to be considered as typical only in the presence of intracardiac prostheses. The requirements for timing and separate venipunctures for blood cultures were removed. Last, additional predisposing conditions (transcatheter valve implants, endovascular cardiac implantable electronic devices, prior IE) were clarified. These diagnostic criteria should be updated periodically by making the Duke-ISCVID Criteria available online as a "Living Document."
963. External Validation of the 2023 Duke - International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) Diagnostic Criteria for Infective Endocarditis (IE)

Thomas W van der Vaart,Patrick M M Bossuyt,Larry M Baddour,Arnold S Bayer,David T Durack,Emanuele Durante Mangoni,Thomas L Holland,Adolf W Karchmer,José M Miró,Philippe Moreillon,Magnus Rasmussen,Christine Selton-Suty,Vance G Fowler,Jan T M van der Meer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.024

2023-11-27

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

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

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Evaluating the Duke Criteria for infectious endocarditis in a single-center retrospective study

Sascha d'Almeida,Kathrin Reischmann,Stefanie Andreß,Dominik Felbel,Tilman Stephan,Birgit Hay,Friederike Rohlmann,Dominik Buckert,Wolfgang Rottbauer,Sinisa Markovic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70196-x

IF: 4.6

2024-08-26

Scientific Reports

Abstract:The Duke Criteria have shaped the way infectious endocarditis (IE) is diagnosed in the last 30 years. This study aims to evaluate their current validity and importance in the diagnostic of IE. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 163 consecutive patients who presented at the University Hospital in Ulm (Germany) with clinical suspicion of IE between 2009 and 2019. With patients' medical records we differentiated between definitive endocarditis (DIE), possible endocarditis (PIE) and rejected endocarditis (RIE) and assessed the validity of the Duke Criteria in comparison to the final discharge diagnosis. We then tried to identify new potential parameters as an addition to the current valid Duke Criteria. The validity of the Duke Criteria improves with the length of hospitalization (especially cardiac imaging criterion, RIE 33.3%, PIE 31.6% and DIE 41.9%, p = 0.622 at admission and RIE 53.3%, PIE 68.4%, DIE 92.2%, p < 0.001 at discharge). At admission, overall sensitivity and specificity were respectively 29.5 and 91.2% in the DIE group. At discharge, sensitivity in the DIE group rose to 77.5% and specificity decreased to 79.4%. Of all screened metrics, microhematuria ( p = 0.124), leukocyturia, ( p = 0.075), younger age ( p = 0.042) and the lack of rheumatoid disease ( p = 0.011) showed a difference in incidence ( p < 0.2) when comparing DIE and RIE group. In multivariate regression only microhematuria qualified as a potential sixth minor criterion at admission. Even with the latest technological breakthroughs our findings suggest that the Duke Criteria continue to hold value in the accurate assessment of IE. Future efforts must shorten the time until diagnosis.

multidisciplinary sciences
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

Helena Lindberg,Andreas Berge,Martin Jovanovic-Stjernqvist,Malin Hagstrand Aldman,David Krus,Jonas Öberg,Fredrik Kahn,Anna Bläckberg,Torgny Sunnerhagen,Magnus Rasmussen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae040

IF: 20.999

2024-02-09

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Background Revised diagnostic criteria for infective endocarditis (IE), the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria, were recently presented and need validation. Here, we compare the 2000 modified Duke criteria for IE with Duke-ISCVID among patients with bacteremia and relate the diagnostic classification to IE-treatment. Methods We reanalyzed patient cohorts with Stapylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus lugdunensis, non-beta-hemolytic streptococci, Streptococcus-like bacteria, Streptococcus dysgalactiae, Enterococcus faecalis and HACEK bacteremia. Episodes were classified as definite, possible or rejected IE with the modified Duke and Duke-ISCVID criteria. Reclassification included the microbiology criteria, PET-CT and cardiac implanted elect-ronical devices. To calculate sensitivity, patients treated as IE were considered as having IE. Results In 4050 episodes of bacteremia, the modified Duke criteria criteria assigned 307episodes (7.6%) as definite IE, 1190 episodes (29%) as possible IE and 2553 episodes (63%) as rejected IE. Using the Duke-ISCVID criteria, 13 episodes (0.3%) were reclassified from possible to definite IE and 475 episodes (12%) were reclassified from rejected to possible IE. With the modified Duke criteria, 79 episodes that were treated as IE were classified as possible IE and eleven of these episodes were reclassified to definite IE with Duke-ISCVID. Applying the decision to treat for IE as reference standard, the sensitivity of the Duke-ISCVID criteria was 80%. None of the 475 episodes reclassified to possible IE were treated as IE. Conclusions The Duke-ISCVID criteria reclassified a small proportion of episodes to definite IE at the expense of more episodes of possible IE. Future criteria should minimize the possible group while keeping or improving sensitivity.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Evaluation of the specificity of the 2023 Duke-International Society of Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases classification for infective endocarditis

Hugo Moisset,Julien Rio,Johan Benhard,Florence Arnoult,Laurene Deconinck,Nathalie Grall,Bernard Iung,Xavier Lescure,François Rouzet,Gaspard Suc,Bruno Hoen,Claire Amaris Hobson,Xavier Duval

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae034

IF: 20.999

2024-02-09

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Background The 2023 Duke-ISCVID classification is a new diagnostic tool for infective endocarditis, updating the 2000 modified Duke and the 2015 ESC classifications. In comparison, its' sensitivity is higher, however its' specificity remains to be evaluated and compared to that of the two other classifications in endocarditis suspected patients. Methods We retrospectively collected the characteristics of patients hospitalized in Bichat University's Hospital, Paris, in 2021, who had been evaluated for clinical suspicion of endocarditis, have had at least a transthoracic echocardiography, two pairs of blood cultures, 3-month follow-up and in whom endocarditis diagnosis was finally rejected. All patients were classified by 2000 modified Duke, 2015 ESC and 2023 Duke-ISCVID, as though the endocarditis diagnosis had not been rejected. Results In total, 130 patients' charts were analyzed. Mean age was 62 years, 84 (64.6%) were male, 39 (30.0%) had prosthetic cardiac valve or valve repair, 21 (16.2%) cardiac implanted electronic device, and 30 (23.1%) other cardiac conditions. Overall, 5, 2 and 5 patients were falsely classified as definite endocarditis with the 2000 modified Duke, 2015 ESC, and 2023 Duke-ISCVID classifications, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 96.2% (95% CI [90.8%; 98.6%]), 98.5% (95% CI [93.9%; 99.7%]), and 96.2% (95% CI [90.8%; 98.6%]). The rates of possible endocarditis were of 38%, 35%, and 35% in the 3 classifications, respectively. Conclusion The 2023 Duke-ISCVID classification is highly specific for ruling out the diagnosis of definite infective endocarditis in patients who had been evaluated for IE.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Comparison of the 2015 and 2023 European Society of Cardiology versions of the Duke criteria among patients with suspected infective endocarditis

Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris,Pierre Monney,Michelle Frank,Georgios Tzimas,Nicolas Fourre,Virgile Zimmermann,Piergiorgio Tozzi,Matthias Kirsch,Mathias Van Hemelrijck,Jana Epprecht,Benoit Guery,Barbara Hasse

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae370

IF: 20.999

2024-07-14

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Diagnosing infective endocarditis (IE) poses a significant challenge. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 2015 and 2023 Duke clinical criteria introduced by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in a cohort of patients suspected of having IE. Conducted retrospectively at two Swiss University Hospitals between 2014-2023, the study involved patients with suspected IE. Each hospitals' Endocarditis Team categorized case as either IE or not IE. The performance of each iteration of the Duke-ESC clinical criteria was assessed based on the agreement between definite IE and the diagnoses made by the Endocarditis Team. Among the 3127 episodes with suspected IE, 1177 (38%) were confirmed to have IE. Using the 2015 Duke-ESC clinical criteria, 707 (23%) episodes were deemed definite IE, with 696 (98%) receiving a final IE diagnosis. With the 2023 Duke-ESC clinical criteria, 855 (27%) episodes were classified as definite IE, of which 813 (95%) were confirmed as IE. The 2015 and 2023 Duke-ESC clinical criteria categorized 1039 (33%) and 1034 (33%) episodes, respectively, as possible IE. Sensitivity for the 2015 Duke-ESC and the 2023 Duke-ESC clinical criteria was calculated at 59% (95% CI: 56-62%), and 69% (66-72%), respectively, with specificity at 99% (99-100%), and 98% (97-98%), respectively. The 2023 ESC criteria demonstrated significant improvements in sensitivity compared to the 2015 version, although one-third of episodes were classified as possible IE by both versions.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
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

Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris,Pierre Monney,Michelle Frank,Georgios Tzimas,Piergiorgio Tozzi,Matthias Kirsch,Mathias Van Hemelrijck,Robert Bauernschmitt,Jana Epprecht,Benoit Guery,Barbara Hasse

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae003

IF: 20.999

2024-01-04

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:The Duke criteria for infective endocarditis (IE) diagnosis underwent revisions in 2023 by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID). This study aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of these criteria, focusing on patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB). This Swiss multicenter study conducted between 2014 and 2023 pooled data from three cohorts. It evaluated the performance of each iteration of the Duke criteria by assessing the degree of concordance between definite S. aureus IE (SAIE) and the diagnoses made by the Endocarditis Team (2018-23) or IE expert clinicians (2014-17). Among 1344 SAB episodes analyzed, 486 (36%) were identified as cases of SAIE. The 2023 Duke-ISCVID and 2023 Duke-ESC criteria demonstrated improved sensitivity for SAIE diagnosis (81% and 82%, respectively) compared to the 2015 Duke-ESC criteria (75%). However, the new criteria exhibited reduced specificity for SAIE (96% for both) compared to the 2015 criteria (99%). Spondylodiscitis was more prevalent among patients with SAIE compared to those with SAB alone (10% versus 7%, P 0.026). However, when patients meeting the minor 2015 Duke-ESC vascular criterion were excluded, the incidence of spondylodiscitis was similar between SAIE and SAB patients (6% versus 5%, P 0.461). The 2023 Duke-ISCVID and 2023 Duke-ESC clinical criteria, show improved sensitivity for SAIE diagnosis compared to 2015 Duke-ESC criteria. However, this increase in sensitivity comes at the expense of reduced specificity. Future research should aim at evaluating the impact of each component introduced within these criteria. This graphical abstract is also available at Tidbit: https://tidbitapp.io/tidbits/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-4d720a6c-75d3-4eb6-8c98-192e8fefc6eb

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
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

Francois Goehringer,Benoit Lalloué,Christine Selton-Suty,François Alla,Elisabeth Botelho-Nevers,Catherine Chirouze,Elodie Curlier,Safwane El Hatimi,Amandine Gagneux-Brunon,Vincent le Moing,Pascal Lim,Lionel Piroth,Christophe Strady,Christophe Tribouilloy,Jean-Marc Virion,Nelly Agrinier,Xavier Duval,Bruno Hoen,Nelly Agrinier,François Alla,Guillaume Béraud,Elisabeth Botelho-Nevers,Catherine Chirouze,François Delahaye,Xavier Duval,François Goehringer,Bruno Hoen,Bernard Iung,Christine Selton Suty,Christophe Strady,Pierre Tattevin,Corentine Alauzet,Patrick Assayag,Kasra Azarnoush,Mathieu Blot,Yohann Bohbot,Kevin Bouiller,Marielle Buisson,Elodie Curlier,Enrica Dorigo,Michel Duong,Mazen Elfarra,Clémentine Esteve,Laura Filippetti,Damien Fournier,Nathalie Grand,Raphaëlle Huguet,Emila Ilic-Habensus,Audrey Le Bot,Benjamin Lefèvre,Raphaël Lepeule,Sophie Mahy,Charles Monnin,Basile Mouhat,Franck Noël,Nathalie Pansu,Lucas Perez,Andranik Petrosyan,Romain Pierrard,Matthieu Revest,Thibault Sixt,Anne Suzat,Charles Tassigny,Noémie Tissot,Dehbia Aboudaoud,Hassina Bouguerra,Catherine Campagnac,Carole Charles,Giulia Corradi,Sandra Dupuy,Eola Francius,Sandrine Gerset,Sandrine Gohier,Mesut Gun,Maryse André,Véronique Ronat,Tubanur Unal Albayrak,Marie-Line Erpelding,Nadine Juge,Benoit Lalloué,Willy Ngueyon Sime,Marie Sponga,Jean-Marc Virion,the AEPEI - ObservatoireEI study group

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae035

IF: 20.999

2024-02-09

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:The 2023 Duke-ISCVID Criteria for infective endocarditis (IE) were proposed as an updated diagnostic classification of IE. Using an open prospective multicenter cohort of patients treated for IE, we compared the performance of these new criteria to that of the 2000 Modified Duke and 2015 ESC criteria. Cases of patients treated for IE between January 2017 and October 2022 were adjudicated as certain IE or not. Each case was also categorized as either definite or possible/rejected within each classification. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were estimated, with 95% confidence intervals. Of the 1194 patients analyzed (mean age 66.1 years, 71.2% men), 414 (34.7%) had a prosthetic valve and 284 (23.8%) had a cardiac implanted electronic device (CIED); 946 (79.2%) were adjudicated as certain IE; 978 (81.9%), 997 (83.5%), and 1057 (88.5%) were classified as definite IE in the 2000 modified Duke, 2015 ESC, and 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria, respectively. The sensitivity of each set of criteria was 93.2% [91.6-94.8], 95.0% [93.7-96.4], and 97.6% [96.6-98.6], respectively (p<.001 for all 2-by-2 comparisons). Corresponding specificity rates were 61.3% [55.2-67.4), 60.5% [54.4-66.6], and 46.0% [39.8-52.2], respectively. In patients without CIED, sensitivity rates were 94.8% [93.2-96.4], 96.5% [95.1-97.8], and 97.7% [96.6-98.8] and specificity rates were 59.0% [51.6-66.3], 56.6% [49.3-64.0], and 53.8% [46.3-61.2], respectively. Overall, the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria had a significantly higher sensitivity but a significantly lower specificity, compared to older criteria. This decreased specificity was mainly attributable to patients with CIED. This graphical abstract is also available at Tidbit: https://tidbitapp.io/tidbits/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/update

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Infective endocarditis:a review of 28 cases

Yaojiang Xu,Lilin Liu,Zhihui Zhou,Fang Lyu,Yunsong Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6680.2014.01.009

2014-01-01

Abstract:Objective To investigate the clinical features,diagnostic examinations,treatment and clinical outcomes of patients with definite infective endocarditis (IE).Methods This retrospective study included 28 adults with IE who were admitted to Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital from January 1,2009 to June 30,2011.All the IE cases met the modified Duke criteria and the data were reviewed on clinical presentations,microbiological profiles,echocardiographic findings,in-hospital course and clinical outcomes.Results The mean age was (50.9± 17.4) years with a male preponderance.All patients had native valve IE.Mitral valve prolapse was the most common underlying heart disease.Fever was presented as the primary manifestation.Blood culture results were positive only in 36.4％ of the 11 cases.Streptococcus viridans represented the leading causative agent.Echocardiography was positive in 96.4％ of the cases.46.4％ of the cases underwent surgery for IE.Eighteen cases had at least one major complication.The in hospital mortality was 3.6％.Conclusions Typical clinical presentations of IE are rare.Comparing with previous studies,there are no changing trends in the microbiology.Advanced antibiotics are overused during the treatment,which is awaiting improvements.
Clinical Value of Intraoperative Real-Time Three-Dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiography for Surgery in Patients with Infective Endocarditis

许立龙,赵博文,李世岩,钱希明,何启才,张伟民,王蓓,余婵

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1004-4477.2013.01.006

2013-01-01

Abstract:Objective To investigate the value of the intraoperative real-time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (RT 3D-TEE) applied in the surgery for patients with the infective endocarditis (IE).Methods 27 patients who were diagnosed as IE by clinical examination and underwent surgical treatment were analyzed retrospectively,all these cases were proved by pathology.RT 3D TEE was performed for assessing the invasive valves,the position of vegetation and complications of IE before cardiopulmonary bypass.The echocardiographic results of 2D-TTE and RT 3D-TEE were both compared with the surgical findings.Results RT 3D-TEE was superior to 2D-TTE for identifying valvular perforation,abscess,rupture of chordae tendinea and rupture of papillary muscle since higher sensitivity and Youden index.RT 3D-TEE was more accurate than 2D-TTE for identifying vegetation (P =0.035).2 cases still presented moderate to severe mitral regurgitation after valvuloplasty.Perivalvular leakage was detected by intraoperative RT 3D-TEE in 2 cases.Additionally,the presentation of left ventricular outflow stenosis after biological valve replacement of mitral valve was found by intraoperative RT 3D-TEE in 1 case.Conclusions Intraoperative RT 3D-TEE is helpful for providing additional diagnostic information before bypass,identifying the strategy for the operation and instantly assessing the effect of the surgery after heart resuscitation.
Evaluation of the specificity of the 2023 European Society of Cardiology classification for infective endocarditis

Hugo Moisset,Julien Rio,Gaspard Suc,Johan Benhard,Florence Arnoult,Laurene Deconinck,Nathalie Grall,Bernard Iung,Francois-Xavier Lescure,François Rouzet,Bruno Hoen,Xavier Duval,Claire Amaris Hobson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23744235.2024.2412155

2024-10-11

Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Background The 2023 Duke-ISCVID and 2023 ESC classifications have recently issued independent diagnostic criteria for infective endocarditis (IE), updating the 2015 ESC criteria.

infectious diseases
A clinical analysis of 51 cases of infective endocarditis

Huang Jian-rong

2011-01-01

Abstract:Objective To analyze the clinical features of infective endocarditis(IE) and help in early diagnosis and treatment.Method A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical profiles of 51 cases comfirmed as IE from 20009.1.1 to 2010.10.31.The clinical profiles included underlying cardiac diseases,blood culture results,echocardiographic manifestations as well as clinical outcomes.Result Of the 51 patients,14(27.45%) had no underlying cardiac diseases,exceeding those(23.50%) who had previous rheumatic valvular disease.The predominat causative organism was Staphylococci(46.88%,15/32) and the second most prevalent pathogen was Streptococcus(28.12%,9/32).Echocardiographic evaluation showed a high positive rate(80.39%).21 patients underwent surgical treatments.5 cases of death occurred in the 51 cases.Conclusion The clinical characteristics of IE has greatly changed.The management of IE requires multidisciplinary cooperation.Clinicians and surgeons shall cooperate to manage the disease.
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

Nicolas Fourre,Virgile Zimmermann,Laurence Senn,Pierre Monney,Georgios Tzimas,Giorgia Caruana,Piergiorgio Tozzi,Matthias Kirsch,Benoit Guery,Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae315

IF: 20.999

2024-06-08

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Streptococci are a common cause of infective endocarditis (IE). We aimed to evaluate the performance of the HANDOC score to identify patients at high-risk for IE and the Duke clinical criteria of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC; 2015 and 2023 versions) and the 2023 version from the International Society of Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) in diagnosing IE among patients with streptococcal bacteremia. This retrospective study included adult patients with streptococcal bacteremia hospitalized at Lausanne University Hospital. Episodes were classified as IE by the Endocarditis Team. A HANDOC score >2 classified patients as high-risk for IE. Among 851 episodes with streptococcal bacteremia, IE was diagnosed in 171 episodes (20%). Among 607 episodes with non-beta-hemolytic streptococci, 213 (35%) had HANDOC scores >2 points; 132 (22%) had IE. The sensitivity of the HANDOC score to identify episodes at high-risk for IE was 95% (90-98%), the specificity 82% (78-85%), and the NPV 98% (96-99%). 2015 Duke-ESC, 2023 Duke-ISCVID, and 2023 Duke-ESC clinical criteria classified 114 (13%), 145 (17%), and 126 (15%) episodes as definite IE, respectively. Sensitivity for the 2015 Duke-ESC, 2023 Duke-ISCVID, and 2023 Duke-ESC clinical criteria was calculated at 65% (57-72%), 81% (74-86%), and 73% (65-79%), respectively, with specificity at 100% (98-100%), 99% (98-100%), and 99% (98-100%), respectively. The HANDOC score showed an excellent NPV to identify episodes at high-risk for IE. Among the different versions of the Duke criteria, the 2023 Duke-ISCVID version fared better for the diagnosis of IE among streptococcal bacteremia.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Overall Accuracy of the Modified Duke Criteria—A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Tulio Caldonazo,Panagiotis Tasoudis,Torsten Doenst,Dimitrios Moris,Lillian Kang,Alexandros Moschovas,Hristo Kirov,Ricardo E. Treml,Michel Pompeu Sá,Stefan Hagel,Mahmoud Diab

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2462-8950

2024-12-01

The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon

Abstract:Background Rapid and accurate diagnosis of infective endocarditis (IE) allows timely management of this life-threatening disease and improves outcome. The Duke criteria have traditionally been the clinical method for diagnosing IE. These criteria were reformulated at different timepoints. We aimed to evaluate the real accuracy of the modified Duke criteria based on several studies that concluded the diagnosis of IE. Methods Three databases were assessed. Studies were considered for inclusion if they reported the use of modified Duke criteria as the initial approach and the confirmation of the diagnosis with the gold standard methods. The meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy was performed after fitting the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model (HSROC) with bivariate model and displaying the summarized measures of sensitivity and specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. Results A total of 11 studies were included. Accuracy in the included studies ranged from 62.3 to 92.2%, sensitivity ranged from 58.3 to 84.0%, and specificity ranged from 50.0 to 100%. The combined overall sensitivity and specificity were 85% (95% CI: 0.77–0.90) and 98% (95% CI: 0.89–0.99), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 40.2 (95% CI: 7.26–220.74) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.15 (95% CI: 0.01–0.23). Conclusion The analysis reveals that the modified Duke criteria have a high positive likelihood ratio, suggesting a robust correlation between a positive test result and the existence of IE, and a very good overall specificity at 98%. The latter aspect holds significant importance in order to prevent unnecessary overtreatment, given the intricacies involved in managing IE. The data underlying this article are available in the article and in its online supplementary material. T.C., P.T., S.H., and M.D. designed the study. D.M., L.K., and A.M. performed the literature review in three different libraries. T.C., H.K., and R.T. selected the studies, assessed them for risk of bias, performed data abstraction, built the tables, and organized the results. P.T. and M.P.S. performed the statistical analyses. T.C., T.D., S.H., and M.D. analyzed the data. T.C., T.D., S.H., and M.D. wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript. This modality of meta-analysis involves different steps that need to be executed and coordinated collectively. * These authors contributed equally to this work. Received: 01 July 2024 Accepted: 05 November 2024 Article published online: 29 November 2024 © 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

surgery,cardiac & cardiovascular systems,respiratory system
Characteristics of Infective Endocarditis in a Tertiary Hospital in East China

Huimin Xu,Siyu Cai,Haibin Dai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166764

IF: 3.7

2016-01-01

PLoS ONE

Abstract:The epidemiology, clinical presentation, and treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) has significantly changed over the past few years in developed countries. However, relevant data from developing countries are different and remain scarce. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical presentations, treatment and outcomes of IE patients in a tertiary hospital in East China over an 8-year period. This was a retrospective observational study of consecutive cases of definite or possible IE as per the modified Duke criteria between January 2008 and December 2015. A total of 135 definite and 39 probable IE cases were identified. The mean age was 47.8 ± 15.7 years, with a male preponderance (1.9: 1). Degenerative valve disease accounted for 30.5% cases of IE, followed by congenital heart disease (29.9%) and rheumatic heart disease (14.9%). Native cardiac valves were present in 93.7% of the IE patients. Echocardiography and blood culture were performed in all patients, of whom 55.2% were found to have large vegetations (≥10 mm) and the positive rate of blood culture was 60.3%. Streptococcus remained the chief causative agent that was identified in 61.9% of culture-positive patients. Glycopeptide antibacterials and cephalosporins were the most frequently used antimicrobial drugs for IE therapy. Seventy-six (43.7%) of the IE patients were surgically treated. The mortality rate during hospital stay was 10.9%. Our data reflected clinical and microbiological profile, and treatment of IE in a tertiary hospital located in the East China.

Duke Infective Endocarditis Criteria 3.0 for the Clinician: Defining What Is Possible

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

Evaluation of the 2023 Duke-ISCVID criteria for infective endocarditis in patients referred to the Lund infective endocarditis team

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

The 2023 Duke-International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases Criteria for Infective Endocarditis: Updating the Modified Duke Criteria

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

Evaluating the Duke Criteria for infectious endocarditis in a single-center retrospective study

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

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 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

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

Infective endocarditis:a review of 28 cases

Clinical Value of Intraoperative Real-Time Three-Dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiography for Surgery in Patients with Infective Endocarditis

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

A clinical analysis of 51 cases of infective endocarditis

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

Overall Accuracy of the Modified Duke Criteria—A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Characteristics of Infective Endocarditis in a Tertiary Hospital in East China