Is early surgical treatment for infective endocarditis superior to conservative approach?

Abstract Background Despite current progress in antibiotic therapy and medical management, infective endocarditis remains a serious condition presenting with high mortality rates. It also is a life-threatening complication in patients with a history of chronic intravenous drug abuse. In this study, we analyzed our institutional experience on the surgical therapy of infective endocarditis in patients with active intravenous drug abuse. The aim of the study is to identify the predictive factors of mortality and morbidity in this subgroup of patients. Methods Between 2007 and 2020, a total of 24 patients (7 female, mean age 38.5 ± 8.7) presenting with active intravenous drug abuse underwent a surgical treatment for the infective endocarditis at out center. The primary endpoint was survival at 30th day after the surgery. The secondary composite endpoint included freedom from death, recurrent endocarditis, re-do surgery, and postoperative stroke during the follow-up period. Mean follow-up was 4.2 ± 4.3 years. Results Staphylococcus species was the most common pathogen detected in the preoperative blood cultures. Infection caused by Enterococcus species as well as liver function impairment were identified as mortality predictor factors. Logistic EuroSCORE and EusoSCORE-II were also predictive factors for mortality in univariate analysis. Survival at 1 and 3 years was 78 and 72% respectively. Thirty-day survival was 88%. 30-day freedom from combined endpoint was 83% and after 1 and 3 years, 69 and 58% of the patients respectively were free from combined endpoint. Five patients (20.8%) were readmitted with recurrent infective endocarditis. Conclusion In patients presenting with active intravenous drug abuse, treatment of infective endocarditis should be performed as aggressively as possible and should be followed by antibiotic therapy to avoid high mortality rates and recurrent endocarditis. Early intervention is advisable in patients with an infective endocarditis and enterococcus species in the preoperative blood cultures, liver function deterioration as well as cardiac function impairment. Attention should be also payed to addiction treatment, due to the elevated relapse rate in patients who actively inject drugs. However, larger prospective studies are necessary to support our results. As septic shock is the most frequent cause of death, new treatment options, e.g. blood purification should be evaluated.

Download Full-text

Early Surgery Does Not Improve Outcomes for Patients with Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures—Results from the Registry for Geriatric Trauma of the German Trauma Society

Medicina ◽

10.3390/medicina57060517 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 57 (6) ◽

pp. 517

Author(s):

Christopher Bliemel ◽

Katherine Rascher ◽

Tom Knauf ◽

Juliana Hack ◽

Daphne Eschbach ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Surgical Treatment ◽

Mortality Rate ◽

Femoral Fractures ◽

Geriatric Trauma ◽

Outcome Parameters ◽

Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures ◽

Trauma Society ◽

Eq5d Index ◽

Early Surgical Treatment

Background and Objectives: Appropriate timing of surgery for periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) in geriatric patients remains unclear. Data from a large international geriatric trauma register were analyzed to examine the outcome of patients with PFF with respect to the timing of surgical stabilization. Materials and Methods: The Registry for Geriatric Trauma of the German Trauma Society (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie (DGU)) (ATR-DGU) was analyzed. Patients treated surgically for PFF were included in this analysis. As outcome parameters, in-house mortality rate and mortality at the 120-day follow-up as well as mobility, the EQ5D index score and reoperation rate were analyzed in relation to early (<48 h) or delayed (≥48 h) surgical stabilization. Results: A total of 1178 datasets met the inclusion criteria; 665 fractures were treated with osteosynthesis (56.4%), and 513 fractures were treated by implant change (43.5%). In contrast to the osteosynthesis group, the group with implant changes underwent delayed surgical treatment more often. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of mortality rate (p = 0.310), walking ability (p = 0.239) and EQ5D index after seven days (p = 0.812) revealed no significant differences between early (<48 h) and delayed (≥48 h) surgical stabilization. These items remained insignificant at the follow-up as well. However, the odds of requiring a reoperation within 120 days were significantly higher for delayed surgical treatment (OR: 1.86; p = 0.003). Conclusions: Early surgical treatment did not lead to decreased mortality rates in the acute phase or in the midterm. Except for the rate of reoperation, all other outcome parameters remained unaffected. Nevertheless, for most patients, early surgical treatment should be the goal, so as to achieve early mobilization and avoid secondary nonsurgical complications. If early stabilization is not possible, it can be assumed that orthogeriatric co-management will help protect these patients from further harm.

Download Full-text