Prognosis of prosthetic valve infective endocarditis due to Streptococcus spp., a retrospective multi-site study to assess the impact of antibiotic treatment duration.

PURPOSE: The duration of antibiotic treatment for prosthetic valve endocarditis caused by Streptococcus spp. is largely based on clinical observations and expert opinion rather than empirical studies. Here we assess the impact of a shorter antibiotic duration. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of antibiotic treatment duration for streptococcal prosthetic valve endocarditis on 12-month mortality as well as subsequent morbidity resulting in additional cardiac surgical interventions, and rates of relapse and reinfection. METHODS: This retrospective multisite (N= 3) study examines two decades of data on patients with streptococcal prosthetic valve endocarditis receiving either 4 or 6 weeks of antibiotics. Overall mortality, relapse, and reinfection rates were also assessed for the entire available follow-up period. RESULTS: The sample includes 121 patients (median age 72 years, IQR [53; 81]). The majority (74%, 89/121) received a ß-lactam antibiotic combined with aminoglycoside in 74% (89/121, median bi-therapy 5 days [1; 14]). Twenty-eight patients underwent surgery guided by ESC-guidelines (23%). The 12-month mortality rate was not significantly affected by antibiotic duration (4/40, 10% in the 4-week group vs 3/81, 3.7% in the 6-week group, p=0.34) or aminoglycoside usage (p=0.1). Similarly, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups for secondary surgical procedures (7/40 vs 21/81, p=0.42), relapse or reinfection (1/40 vs 2/81 and 2/40 vs 5/81 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found no increased adverse outcomes associated with a 4-week antibiotic duration compared to the recommended 6-week regimen. Further randomized trials are needed to ascertain the optimal duration of treatment for streptococcal endocarditis.

Pulmonary tuberculosis: Evaluation of current diagnostic strategy.

OBJECTIVE: To identify tools that will result in faster diagnosis, making the current pulmonary tuberculosis strategy more efficient. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 4-year (2015-2018) retrospective study. The gold standard for diagnosis was a positive culture from a respiratory specimen. All sputum, fibroscopy and post-fibroscopy specimens (for smear negative patients) were collected. Each specimen was analyzed through smear examination and culture. All nucleic acid amplification testing results were included. Analyses looked at the incremental yield of positive cases of each successive specimen collection, and time to diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients had at least one positive culture. Sputum allowed a diagnosis in 92% of cases (including a gain in sensitivity of around 7% for the third sputum specimen), with 160 smear-positive patients (45%). Among smear-negative patients, 109 underwent a fibroscopy procedure (culture sensitivity of 75%), and 59 had a post-fibroscopy specimen collected, which together identified the rest of the patients (8%). Molecular testing was used in 237 specimens. Median time to diagnosis was 11 days, which was significantly reduced among smear-negative patients when molecular testing was used (P<0.001). Shortening the delay between sputum specimen collections did not alter procedure sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several aspects of the French tuberculosis diagnosis algorithm that could be improved, and posed the basis for a prospective study. Centers in higher incidence areas could benefit from a dedicated, predefined procedure exploring suspicions of tuberculosis. A high suspicion score of tuberculosis could drive the reasoned use of molecular testing in such settings.