Wilson, Walter R.

The efficacy of ceftriaxone or penicillin alone or combined with gentamicin at different dosing intervals was evaluated in experimental endocarditis due to a penicillin-susceptible, ceftriaxone-tolerant strain of Streptococcus sanguis I. The difference between monotherapy with ceftriaxone and procaine penicillin approached statistical significance (P = 0.052). Ceftriaxone combined with gentamicin administered as a single daily dose was less effective than was procaine penicillin combined with gentamicin administered in a single daily dose or in three divided doses.

AbstractBackgroundCulture‐negative (CN) cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infections represent a significant management challenge for clinicians with no specific guidelines addressing this subgroup of patients. The aim of the current investigation is to report our institutional experience of CN CIED infections and propose a systematic approach to diagnostic evaluation and management of these complicated cases based on our observations.MethodsWe retrospectively screened all CIED infection cases at Mayo Clinic from 2005 through 2017. Using standardized criteria to define significant microbial growth, all patients with positive blood or pocket/device cultures were excluded.ResultsA total of 835 cases of CIED infection were screened, and of these, 47 (6%) met CN‐CIED infection criteria. Majority of patients (77%) in this cohort had received antimicrobial therapy prior to device cultures with a median duration of 8 days. The most common presentation was device pocket infection (81%). All patients underwent device removal. Route of antibiotics was switched from oral to parenteral and spectrum of activity expanded from initial therapy in 23% of patients despite negative cultures. Majority of patients (80%) were dismissed on parenteral therapy. Adverse events attributed to intravenous antibiotic therapy were documented in 63% of the cases. No recurrence was reported and 6‐month survival was 94.8%.ConclusionsPocket and device cultures in suspected CIED infections may be negative due to preextraction oral antibiotics. However, frequently these patients are managed with broad‐spectrum parenteral therapy postextraction.

Background— Prompt recognition of underlying cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infection in patients presenting with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) is critical for optimal management of these cases. The goal of this study was to identify clinical predictors of CIED infection in patients presenting with SAB and no signs of pocket infection. Methods and Results— All cases of SAB in CIED recipients at Mayo Clinic from 2001 to 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. We identified 131 patients with CIED who presented with SAB and had no clinical signs of device pocket infection. Forty-five (34%) of these patients had underlying CIED infection based on clinical or echocardiographic criteria. The presence of a permanent pacemaker rather than an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (odds ratio, 3.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.65–9.23; P =0.002), >1 device-related procedure (odds ratio, 3.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.23–8.86; P =0.018), and duration of SAB ≥4 days (odds ratio, 5.54; 95% confidence interval, 3.32–13.23; P <0.001) were independently associated with an increased risk of CIED infection in a multivariable model. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for the multivariable model was 0.79, indicating a good discriminatory capacity to distinguish SAB patients with and without CIED infection. Conclusions— Among patients presenting with SAB and no signs of pocket infection, the risk of underlying CIED infection can be calculated based on the type of device, number of device-related procedures, and duration of SAB. We propose that patients without any of these high-risk features have a low risk of underlying CIED infection and may be monitored closely without immediate device extraction. Prospective studies are needed to validate this risk prediction model.