Furthermore, some essential microbiological diagnostic tests are not performed in most of the centers. Some antimicrobials recommended as the first option for treatment of IE, particularly antistaphylococcal penicillins, are unavailable in Turkey.[1-18] These problems necessitate reviewing the epidemiological, laboratory, and clinical characteristics of IE in our country, as well as the current information about its diagnosis, treatment, and prevention with local data. Physicians can follow patients with IE in many specialties. Diagnosis and treatment processes of IE should be standardized at every stage so that management of IE, a setting in which many physicians are involved, can be always in line with current recommendations. From this point of view, the Study Group for Infective Endocarditis and Other Cardiovascular Infections of the Turkish Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases has called for collaboration of the relevant specialist organizations to establish a consensus report on the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of IE in the light of current information and local data in Turkey. In the periodic meetings of the assigned representatives from all the parties, various questions were identified. Upon reviewing related literature and international guidelines, these questions were provided with consensus answers.
Why was this consensus report written?
Infective endocarditis often affects elderly
individuals in developed countries; however, it
still affects young individuals in Turkey. It is one
of the most life-threatening infectious diseases
and is among the infectious disease leading to
mortality frequently in the population. Compared
to the European countries and the United States,
patients with IE are younger, predisposing factors
are different, identification rates of IE pathogens
are lower, accessing to some essential diagnostic
tests are not possible or hardly possible, some of the
antimicrobials recommended for treatment are not
available in our country. Therefore, European and
American diagnostic and treatment guidelines do
not meet our requirements, and this causes a need to
prepare a national consensus report for IE.[1-18]
EPIDEMIOLOGY OF IE IN TURKEY
AND GLOBALLY
What is the incidence of IE in our country and
globally?
The incidence of IE is approximately 6/100,000
people worldwide. There are no data about the
incidence of IE in Turkey, which is predicted to be
higher in our country due to higher incidences of both
valvular diseases and nosocomial bacteremia.[19-51] A
comparison of epidemiological features of IE cases
between Turkey and USA/Europe is shown in Table 1.
Which patient populations have a higher risk of
developing IE in Turkey and globally?
Infective endocarditis is more frequently seen in
patients with a previous episode of IE, a valvular heart
disease, a congenital heart disease, any intracardiac
prosthetic material, intravenous drug use (IVDU),
chronic hemodialysis treatment, solid organ, and
hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, compared to
healthy population.[2,4,5,23,27-31,45,50,52-84] The incidence of
IE among risk groups is shown in Table 2.
Table 2: The incidence of infective endocarditis among risk groups
Which are the most frequently identified
microorganisms that cause IE in Turkey and
globally?
The most frequent causative microorganisms in order
are Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), streptococci,
coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), and
Enterococci both in Turkey and globally. Additionally,
Brucella spp. is the fifth most common causative agent
of IE in Turkey (Table 1). Coxiella burnetii, which is
one of the leading causes of blood culture-negative IE
globally, has been identified in some case reports from our country and, therefore, it must be in the differential
diagnosis. Although Bartonella spp. and Tropheryma
whipplei are frequently the causes of blood culturenegative
IE globally, and there are no available data
about these causative agents in Turkey. The research
concerning these agents should be performed. Gramnegative
bacilli and fungi are often causative agents of
healthcare-associated IE. In patients who underwent
implantation of intracardiac prosthetic devices such as
prosthetic heart valves in the last decade, Mycobacterium
chimaera should be kept in mind as a possible pathogen
for blood culture-negative IE.[4,82,85-127]
PATHOGENESIS OF IE
What is the pathogenesis of IE?
Mechanical injury on the endocardial surface
consequently leads to non-bacterial thrombotic
endocarditis (NBTE) formation on which bacterial
adhesion occurs on its surface during transient
bacteremia. The vegetation enlarges and becomes
mature by bacterial proliferation, deposition of
fibrinogen, and platelet aggregation. S. aureus may
bind directly to an inflamed, but structurally intact
endocardial surface and be ingested by endothelial
cells causing cellular tissue lysis and damage. These
damaged cells induce the release of tissue factor
and cytokines, causing blood clotting and promoting
the extension of inflammation and vegetation
formation [21,27,86,128-136]
DIAGNOSIS OF IE
What are the clinical features in patients with
IE, and which clinical signs should lead to the
suspicion of IE?
Acute IE must be in the differential diagnosis in
patients admitted to the emergency room with fever
who have predisposing factors for IE (i.e., valvular
heart diseases, intracardiac prosthetic devices including
a prosthetic valve or IVDU or chronic hemodialysis).
In addition, patients who have sepsis with an unknown
source, peripheral embolism, multiple infectious foci of
sepsis, and new-onset murmurs should also evaluated
for acute endocarditis.
Either subacute and chronic IE must be kept in mind in the differential diagnosis of patients with unexplained fever, fatigue, weight loss, and increased acute phase reactants; unexplained arterial embolism including central nervous system and pulmonary; unexplained heart and valvular failures; unexplained blood culture positivity, particularly if they have a predisposing condition for IE.[4,14,23,137-143]
What are the laboratory findings of IE?
Continuous bacteremia causes continuous
intravascular stimulation which consequently leads
to acute phase responses to the causative agent,
excessive production of both antibodies, and immune
complexesin patients with IE. Some laboratory test
results may be either lower or higher than the normal
range due to either sepsis or organ failures caused by
the disease itself.[144-172]
Which echocardiographic methods should
be used in the diagnosis of IE and what is the
appropriate timing to do it?
Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) must be
performed for all patients with suspected IE as
soon as possible. Transesophageal echocardiography
(TEE) must be performed in case of negative TTE,
when there is a high index of suspicion for IE, mainly
when TTE is of suboptimal quality. Transthoracic
echocardiography should be also performed in patients
with prosthetic valves or intracardiac prosthetic
devices.[3,65,66,141,173-183]
What are the echocardiographic findings leading
to the diagnosis of IE?
Vegetation, abscess, pseudoaneurysm or
intracardiac fistula, valvular aneurysm or perforation,
new partial dehiscence of the prosthetic valve, and
new or worsening valvular regurgitation are the
echocardiographic findings and images which causes
suspicion of IE.[3,65,66,141]
What are the sensitivities and specificities of the
echocardiographic examinations for the diagnosis
of IE?
The sensitivity of TTE and TEE in the detection of
vegetations in IE patients is 70% and 96% and 50% and
92% in native and prosthetic valves, respectively. Both
modalities have a specificity of 90% for the detection
of vegetation.[173]
What is the role of echocardiography in the
determination of response to treatment and during
follow-up of IE?
While the size and mobility of the vegetations
are expected to decrease with effective antimicrobial
treatment, an increase in vegetation size should be
taken into account as a risk factor for a new embolic
event. It is challenging to interpret persisting and
unchanging vegetation size. In such cases, the patient
should be evaluated carefully with other clinical and
laboratory findings. Well-timed echocardiography is
of vital importance to identify patients with signs and symptoms (i.e., shortness of breath, rhythm conduction
disorders) of a cardiac complication (i.e., heart failure,
valvular regurgitation, abscess formation, aneurysm or
perforation) requiring an emergent surgery.[3,173-186]
When should cardiac computed tomography
(CT) be performed in patients with suspected IE,
and what are the advantages and disadvantages of
cardiac CT?
Although cardiac CT has the advantage of providing
more information about cardiac anatomy (anatomy of
the pseudoaneurysm, abscess, fistula, and perivalvular
extension), it is inferior to TEE in the detection
of vegetation. Cardiac CT should be performed in
high suspicion of either native or prosthetic valve
endocarditis in case of TEE negativity.[65,175,187,188]
When should magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) be performed in patients with suspected IE,
and what are the advantages and disadvantages of
MRI?
The experience with cardiac MRI to define cardiac
pathologies in patients with IE is limited. Nevertheless,
existing evidence suggests that cardiac MRI can
be an excellent option to evaluate cardiac anatomy such as cardiac CT, and further studies are needed.
Currently, MRI is often used to visualize intracranial
complications in patients with neurological symptoms.
Cranial MRI should be the diagnostic choice for IE
patients with neurological symptoms as its sensitivity
is higher than cranial CT in the detection of cranial
lesions.[65,189-190]
When should 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)
positron emission tomography (PET)/CT imaging
be performed in patients with suspected IE, and
what are the advantages and disadvantages of
18F-FDG PET/CT?
18F-FDG PET/CT can be used to confirm
the diagnosis by identifying both valvular and
paravalvular lesions in patients with the suspicion
of prosthetic valve endocarditis after the first three
postoperative months in whom TEE is negative.
18F-FDG PET/CT can be also used to define septic
foci outside the heart, both in native and prosthetic
valve endocarditis. The most important advantages of
this modality are to define infectious foci both inside
and outside the heart, to establish useful data, and to
monitor response to treatment. The false-positivity,
particularly within the first three postoperative months in early prosthetic valve endocarditis and its
lower sensitivity to diagnose intracardiac pathologies
in native valve endocarditis, are the disadvantages of
18F-FDG PET/CT.[175,191-197]
When radiolabeled leukocyte scintigraphy with
single-photon emission computed tomography
(SPECT)/CT should be done in patients with
suspected IE, and what are the advantages and
disadvantages of it?
Radiolabeled leukocyte scintigraphy with SPECT/
CT can be used as an imaging modality for the
diagnosis of prosthetic valve endocarditis within
the first three months of prosthesis implantation.
Although scintigraphy has a higher specificity,
the most significant disadvantage is its lower
sensitivity.[65,198,199]
What should be the algorithm for imaging
modalities in the diagnosis of IE?
Echocardiography is the first imaging modality
of choice to define cardiac lesions in patients with
suspected IE. Both TTE and TEE are usually necessary
for almost all patients. Both are inconclusive in about
15% of all IE cases, whereas this rate increases up to
30% in patients with intracardiac prosthetic devices
such as a prosthetic valve or cardiac implantable
electronic devices (CIEDs). In these patients, cardiac
CT should be the technique of imaging modality in
patients with native valve endocarditis. In contrast,
cardiac CT or SPECT/CT should be chosen for patients
who have prosthetic valve endocarditis within the
first one to three months of valve surgery and cardiac
CT and PET/CT should be chosen for patients with prosthetic valve endocarditis after three months of
valve surgery.[65,66,173-176] Flowchart for the diagnostic
imaging work-up of patients suspected of IE is shown
in Figure 1.[175]
Figure 1: Flowchart for the diagnostic imaging workup of patients suspected of infective endocarditis.[176]
FDG: Fluorodeoxyglucose; PET: Positron emission tomography; MDCTA: Electrocardiogram-gated multidetector CT angiography. TTE: Transthoracic echocardiogram;
TEE: Transesophageal echocardiogram. Circles indicate the end of a diagnostic pathway, when efforts to diagnose (extracardiac complications of) infective endocarditis
can be ceased; * Allocation specifically for the detection of extracardiac foci.
How should blood culture sampling be performed
in patients with suspected IE?
In patients with suspected IE, three sets of blood
cultures (includes three pairs of aerobic and anaerobic
bottles, six bottles in total) should be drawn at 30-min
intervals without waiting for a febrile period. Each
blood culture set, comprised of one aerobic and one
anaerobic bottle, should be inoculated with 18 to
20 mL of blood (9-10 mL blood per bottle). Totally
60 mL of blood should be taken from one patient with
suspected IE. In patients who had cardiac surgery in
the last decade and are suspected of having prosthetic
valve endocarditis, three additional blood culture
bottles specified for mycobacterial growth should
be inoculated, unless there is microbial growth in
usual blood culture bottles. Two sets of control blood
cultures should be repeated every 48 hours after
the initiation of therapy, until blood cultures are
sterile.[3,65,86,119,200-207]
How to culture valvular tissues or embolic
specimens resected during surgery for the diagnosis
of IE?
The excised valvular tissue from patients with
suspected IE should be evaluated both microbiologically
(stains, culture, molecular techniques) and
histopathologically.[208-210]
When and which serological tests should be done
for the diagnosis of IE?
In patients with negative blood cultures, the Wright
agglutination test (with Coomb"s serum) and Coxiella
phase 1 IgG test (IFA) should be performed initially. If
the results of these two tests are negative, IgG antibodies
for Bartonella spp., Legionella spp., Chlamydia spp.,
and Mycoplasma spp. should be tested, preferably by
the IFA method.[4,111,112,210-216]
What are the molecular tests that could be
done in either blood or tissue samples of patients
with suspected IE, and when should they be on the
agenda?
Multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests
(SeptiFast®, SeptiTest®) should be used to identify the pathogen in a whole blood specimen of patients
with suspected endocarditis and whose blood cultures
are negative and who has received previous antibiotic
therapy. If the blood cultures are negative in patients
not receiving received previous antibiotic therapy,
the 16S rRNA gene and Tropheryma whipplei PCR
should be, then, performed on the resected heart valve
obtained during surgery.[140,217-225]
What is the contribution of histopathological
examination of valvular tissue excised from patients
with suspected IE?
Histopathological examination of resected valvular
tissue gives valuable information about the activation
and degree of the inflammation in patients with
blood culture-positive endocarditis. In contrast, in
blood culture-negative IE patients, it allows identifying
pathogens, mainly intracellular ones like Coxiella
burnetii, Bartonella spp., and Tropheryma whipplei
with proper staining and immunohistochemical
examinations.[119,138,225-232] Diagnostic testing algorithms
for the identification of the microbiological etiology of
IE is shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3.
What are the sensitivity and specificity of
modified Duke Criteria in the diagnosis of IE?
The modified Duke criteria have a sensitivity
of 80% in native valve endocarditis, whereas they
are insufficient in patients with prosthetic heart
valves, intracardiac prosthetic devices, and blood culture-negative endocarditis. Additional imaging
techniques and serological and molecular tests
should be added to the diagnostic work-up of these
patients.[65,141,233] The modified Duke Criteria, including
also modification of the European Society of Cardiology
(ESC), is shown in Table 3 and Table 4.[3,65]
Table 3: Definition of infective endocarditis according to the modified Duke criteria[3,65]
Table 4: Definitions of the Terms Used in the European Society of Cardiology 2015 Modified Criteria for the Diagnosis of Infective Endocarditis[3,65]
How is NBTE differentiated from IE?
Non-bacterial thrombotic endocarditis can be seen
with numerous clinical entities such as malignancy,
hypercoagulable states, connective tissue, and
autoimmune disorders. It can be documented in
approximately 1% of patients with malignancy,
most frequently with pancreatic adenocarcinoma
(10%). The main clinical presentation of NBTE is
thromboembolism. It is essential to differentiate NBTE
from IE. The same diagnostic work-up recommended
for IE should be performed. The diagnosis of NBTE
is challenging. It can be diagnosed in patients with the
presence of a disease process known to be associated
with NBTE with high suspicion, if there is the presence
of multiple systemic embolism, fixed vegetation size
despite antibiotic therapy, and a new heart murmur.
In patients with underlying comorbidities which
predispose to NBTE, the presence of heart murmur,
the persistence of vegetation despite appropriate
antibiotic therapy, multiple systemic embolism
should lead to suspicion of the NBTE. Although the
vegetations in NBTE are often small, their roots are
wide and in an irregular shape. The vegetations in NBTE show minimal inflammation where they are
attached.[131,234-236]
PROGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT OF
PATIENTS WITH IE AT ADMISSION AND
DURING FOLLOW-UP
When should the prognostic assessment be done
in IE patients, and what is the benefit of this
assessment?
A prognostic risk assessment should be done
in patients with suspected IE using the Simplified
Risk Scoring System during their first evaluation
(Table 5 and Table 6). The patients with a higher
mortality risk (risk score >8) should be carefully
evaluated on time for urgent surgery and transfer
possibility to a reference center and intensive care
unit (ICU). Prognostic assessment of a patient with
IE should be performed thrice: at admission, within
the first week of the start of antibiotic therapy, and before discharge. Predicting the prognosis of IE
helps clinicians to make an effort to prevent possible
complications and to be prepared to overcome these
complications.[65,66,237-240]
Table 5: Simplified Risk Score Calculation for 6-Month Mortality in Infective Endocarditis (IE)[237]
Table 6: Probability of 6-Month Mortality in Patients with Infective Endocarditis According to Simplified Risk Score[237]
THE IE TEAM IN THE MANAGEMENT
OF PATIENTS
What is the IE Team, and why is there a
necessity for making up such a team?>
The IE team is a multidisciplinary team including
representatives of relevant specialties who manage
the diagnosis and treatment of all IE patients, decide
collaboratively on all aspects of the disease, particularly
on antimicrobial and surgical treatment and meet once
a week or, when needed more frequently, to regularly
follow-up and evaluate patients. Patients with IE can
be followed by physicians from several specialties, as
the disease has a wide range of clinical presentations.
Since it is a rare disease, it is also unlikely that each physician has sufficient experience. All these features
drive to the delayed diagnosis and treatment of the
disease. Consequently, the delay is associated with
increased morbidity and mortality rates.
Therefore the IE teams should be established to diagnose IE, give a standardized therapy following the current guidelines, increase practitioners" knowledge and experience, and follow-up the patients with IE.
A cardiologist, a cardiovascular surgeon, and infectious diseases and clinical microbiology specialists should be present in the IE team, at least. When needed, a neurologist, a radiologist, a nuclear medicine specialist, a pathologist, and a neurosurgeon should join the IE team in referral centers. It has been shown that a multidisciplinary approach decreases morbidity and mortality of IE patients. These patients complicated with heart failure, abscess, neurological complications should be followed in referral centers where there are neurosurgery and cardiac surgery facilities. Uncomplicated cases can be followed in non-reference centers provided that there is close communication with the reference centers, and patients are evaluated by the IE team regularly and should be referred to these centers, when necessary (Table 7 and Table 8).[65,241-245]
Table 7: Department of hospitalization for patients with infective endocarditis
Table 8: Approach to the patient with suspected endocarditis
ANTIMICROBIAL TREATMENT OF IE
What are the general principles of antimicrobial
treatment of in IE, and how should the duration of
treatment be determined?
The bactericidal agents given parenterally for long
duration is the general principle of antimicrobial
treatment of IE. The duration of the antimicrobial
treatment is determined by several factors, including
the pathogen, the presence of prosthetic material, and
the duration of symptoms. The therapy duration is
often four to six weeks for native valve endocarditis
and longer than six weeks for prosthetic valve
endocarditis.[3,86,140,246,247]
Is oral antibiotic therapy feasible to use in the
treatment of left-sided endocarditis?
Since there are questions about the feasibility
and efficacy of oral antimicrobial treatment of
left-sided endocarditis in our country and since
left-sided endocarditis is related to a substantially
higher mortality rate, the parenteral route should be
preferred for the complete duration of antimicrobial
treatment of left-sided endocarditis in Turkey. In case
of unavailability of IV access or outpatient parenteral
antibiotic therapy, oral therapy may be feasible to
complete the therapy duration in stable patients with
uncomplicated native valve endocarditis as a result
of drug-susceptible viridans group Streptococci.
Probability of compliance and follow-up is not going
to be a problem, provided that initial two weeks of
antibiotic therapy completed parenterally, the patient is
informed about all the possible risks and give informed
consent. Switching to oral therapy should be a joint
decision of the IE team.[248-251]
Is empirical treatment necessary for IE?
Antibiotic therapy should be initiated without any
delay, as it reduces not only the risk of an embolic
event in patients with either acute or subacute IE, but also decreases mortality associated with sepsis in
patients with acute IE. Therefore, empirical antibiotics
should be promptly initiated after blood cultures are
taken.[3,65,140,205,246,252]
What are the empirical drugs of choice for
native, early and late prosthetic valve IE in adults
in our country?
Ampicillin-sulbactam±gentamicin can be
initiated empirically in the treatment of communityacquired,
with both subacute and chronic courses
of native and late prosthetic valve endocarditis,
whereas vancomycin+ampicillin-sulbactam (or
ceftriaxone)±gentamicin can be the choice for the
acute course. Vancomycin+cefepime±gentamicin
combination can be initiated empirically in the treatment
of nosocomial native, early, and late prosthetic valve
endocarditis. Gentamicin should be avoided in patients
with initial impaired renal function. Rifampin can
be also added to the empirical treatment of early
prosthetic valve endocarditis. Daptomycin alone is not
a drug of choice for the initial empirical treatment of
IE due to its suboptimal efficacy for Streptococci and
Enterococci and the ease development of resistance in
these strains during treatment (Table 7).[3,65,137,205,253-258]
What are the drugs of choice in the treatment
of streptococcal native and prosthetic valve
endocarditis Turkey?
The decision of treatment in streptococcal IE is
made according to penicillin G minimum inhibitory
concentration (MIC) values of the pathogen. The
first treatment of choice is penicillin G in strains
that are sufficiently sensitive to penicillin G,
penicillin+gentamicin in relatively resistant strains,
and vancomycin or teicoplanin in resistant strains.
Daptomycin is not recommended in endocarditis caused
by Streptococci, which are sensitive to penicillin and
vancomycin, due to the possibility of development of
resistance during treatment.[4,86,205,259-268]
What are the drugs of choice in the treatment of
enterococcal endocarditis in Turkey?
In the treatment of enterococcal endocarditis, if the
strain is sensitive to ampicillin (or penicillin G), the
recommended regimen is ampicillin+gentamicin or
ampicillin+ceftriaxone (if the strain is Enterococcus
faecalis). The recommended regimen is vancomycin
or teicoplanin+gentamicin, if the strain is resistant
to ampicillin. Daptomycin+ampicillin+gentamicin
combination is recommended if it is resistant to
ampicillin, vancomycin, and teicoplanin. Gentamicin
should take part in the treatment unless there is a high
level of gentamicin resistance.[1-4,65, 205,269-282]
What are the drugs of choice in the treatment of
staphylococcal endocarditis in Turkey?
Cefazolin is the drug of choice in methicillinsensitive
Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) IE in Turkey
since anti-staphylococcal penicillins are not available
in the domestic market. In patients with CNS septic
embolism, vancomycin+cefazolin or cefotaxime
should be preferred. Daptomycin should be chosen
in patients who have hypersensitivity reactions such
as anaphylaxis to b-lactam agents. Vancomycin in
combination with cefazolin may be given to patients
who are in risk groups for methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) until antimicrobial
susceptibility test results are achieved. Following
test results indicating MSSA, treatment should be
continued with cefazolin. Adding rifampicin and
gentamicin is not recommended in native valve IE.
In the prosthetic valve IE, cefazolin+gentamicin and
rifampicin combination is recommended.
In MRSA IE, if MIC is ?2 ?g/mL, vancomycin is recommended. Loading doses of vancomycin should be used, particularly for septic patients, followed by daily doses modified according to serum levels, the patient"s weight, and renal functions. If vancomycin MIC is >2 ?g/mL, daptomycin is recommended at doses of 8 to 12 mg/kg/day, which is determined according to its MIC values, in combination with cephazolin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. In patients with MRSA IE, particularly in whom there is persistent bacteremia (>3 to 7 days), the combined vancomycin-cefazolin regimen can be used. In MRSA prosthetic valve IE, if they are sensitive, rifampicin and gentamicin should be added to vancomycin treatment. When there is resistance to these agents, ciprofloxacin can be used as an alternative, if it is sensitive.[3,4,65,86,104,205,259,269,283-355]
THE COMPLICATIONS OF IE AND
THEIR MANAGEMENT
What are the clinical and laboratory signs of
heart failure developing in patients with IE, and
how can they be managed?
Nearly half of the left-sided IE cases, particularly
those with aortic valve involvement, develop heart
failure in which the mortality risk is higher compared
to the right side. Dyspnea, pulmonary edema,
hypotension, and other organs" dysfunction in patients
with IE can be alarming for heart failure. In IE patients
with heart failure, urgent surgery drops mortality rates
significantly.[81,169,173,180,356-364]
Table 9: Empirical antimicrobial treatment of infective endocarditis[3,65,137,205,368]*
In IE patients, what are the clinical and
laboratory signs showing uncontrolled infection,
and how should they be managed?
In IE patients who develop persistent infections
characterized by fever and culture positivity exceeding
five to 10 days or infection spreading around valve
annulus forming an abscess, pseudoaneurysm, fistula, atrioventricular block despite antibiotic
treatment, shows that infection is not under control.
In persistent infections, repeated blood cultures, and
echocardiographic examinations, imaging for different
foci of infection and changing of intravascular catheters
should be performed. Despite all of these, patients with
persistent fever, particularly persistent blood culture
positivity with no other infection source, should be evaluated for early valve surgery. Since recent studies
have shown that blood culture positivity lasting for >48
to 72 hours increases mortality, early surgery for these
patients may be also beneficial.[3,65,86,110,173,271,365-367]
What are the incidence and risk factors of
embolic events in patients with IE? How should
embolic events be managed?
About 20 to 50% of patients with IE have embolic
complications in which the most critical risk factor is
the size (>10 mm) and mobility of vegetations. This
risk dramatically declines with the start of antibiotic
treatment. The decision of early surgery to prevent
embolism is always challenging, and each patient
should be separately evaluated. The factors which
influence this decision are the size and mobility of the
vegetation, the existence of recurrent embolism under
treatment, the type of the microorganism, and the
duration of the antibiotic treatment.[3,65,181,183,368-375]
SURGICAL TREATMENT OF IE
What are the indications and appropriate timing
of valvular surgery in the management of IE?
Urgent surgery is recommended in IE patients
with heart failure. Early surgery is recommended
in uncontrolled local (abscess, fistula, aneurysm) or
systemic (ongoing blood culture positivity or fever with
no other source) infection, recurrent embolism, large
vegetations, and severe left heart valve regurgitation or stenosis without clinical signs of heart failure. If urgent
surgery is indicated, starting antimicrobial treatment
would be enough. There is no need to wait for the
clearance of growth in blood cultures.
The decision of heart valve surgery in IE patients should be made by the IE team (or by cardiologist, cardiovascular surgeon and infectious diseases, and clinical microbiologist) by evaluating all aspects of the disease. In patients with neurological complications, surgical decision should be made by the IE team including a neurologist and a neurosurgeon according to the presence/absence of silent embolism/transient ischemic attack (TIA), ischemic stroke or hemorrhagic stroke, severity of the neurological situation and urgency of cardiovascular surgery.[2,3,27,65,181,376-399] After a silent embolism or TIA, cardiac surgery, if indicated, is recommended without delay (Table 10 and Table 11).[65]
Table 10: Class I Indications and Timing for Surgery in Left-Sided Valve Infective Endocarditis (Recommendations from the European Society of Cardiology 2015 Infective Endocarditis Guideline)[65]
Table 11: Class I Indications for Surgery in Left-Sided Valve Infective Endocarditis (Recommendations from the American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) 2016 Consensus Guideline)[377]
MONITORING TREATMENT
RESPONSE IN PATIENTS WITH IE AND
FOLLOW- UP AFTER DISCHARGE
How should treatment response be monitored in
IE patients?
In IE patients receiving appropriate antibiotic
treatment and undergoing surgical repair (when
needed), fever and serum C-reactive protein (CRP)
levels should decrease, blood cultures are negative, valve functions be stabilized, vegetation size in
echocardiography should not be enlarged, instead,
be reduced, foci of abscess should vanish. Therefore,
after starting antimicrobial treatment, two sets of
blood cultures should be taken every 48 hours, until
positivity in blood cultures be cleared, serial CRP
measurements should be done, and gradual decrease
of CRP level during treatment and reaching normal
levels by the end of the treatment should be expected.
The echocardiographic examination should also be
performed during hospitalization and immediately
before discharge.[65,102,400-404]
What recommendations should be made to IE
patients at discharge?
Since the history of IE is a significant risk factor
for recurrent endocarditis, patients should be informed
about the probability of recurrence of the disease and
signs and symptoms of the condition. They should
be informed about avoiding the use of empirical
antibiotics before blood cultures are collected, in
case of fever, chills, and other symptoms of infection.
They should be also informed about prophylaxis of
endocarditis, and to avoid procedures (piercing, tattoo)
that may cause bacteremia and endocarditis.[65]
How should operated/non-operated IE patients
be followed in outpatient clinics?
In follow-up for detection of possible secondary
heart failure, patients should be monitored with periodic TTE: on discharge as a baseline and serially
in the first year. The patients should be evaluated for
the late side effects of the antibiotics, particularly of
aminoglycosides, used for endocarditis treatment at
the hospital. Periodic follow-up should be scheduled
on the first, third, sixth, and 12th months after hospital
discharge. In these outpatient follow-up visits, clinical
examination, leukocyte count, CRP, and erythrocyte
sedimentation rate (ESR) measurements, and TTE
should be performed to detect a possible heart
failure.[65]
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
What are the critical topics in the management
of patients with prosthetic valve endocarditis?
The diagnosis of prosthetic valve endocarditis is
more complicated than native valve endocarditis, since
both blood culture and echocardiographic examination
are frequently negative. The sensitivities of TTE and
TEE in the diagnosis of prosthetic valve endocarditis
are 30% and 80%, respectively. Infective endocarditis
should be carefully investigated using novel imaging
modalities such as multidetector computed tomographic
angiography (MDCTA), PET/CT in patients with
suspected prosthetic valve endocarditis with normal
echocardiography. Surgery is frequently needed
besides antibiotic treatment in patients who have heart
failure or paravalvular abscess and with endocarditis
caused by S. aureus or fungi.[4,65,187,405-411]
What are the critical topics in the management
of IE associated with CIEDs?
A CIED-associated IE represents almost 10%
of all episodes of IE and is expected to increase
proportionately to the increased number of devices
implanted. Infective endocarditis should be kept in
the differential diagnosis either when there is one or
combination of any of the clinical presentations (fever
of unknown origin, pocket infection, bacteremia with an
unknown source, complications of multiple pulmonary
embolisms) in patients with CIED. Blood cultures
should be taken promptly; if not, TTE and TEE should
investigate any findings of IE. Radiolabeled leukocyte
scintigraphy or PET/CT modalities can be additive in
case of a routine echocardiographic examination in
the diagnosis of CIED-associated endocarditis. The
specific treatment of CIED-associated endocarditis
should be done with the combination of antimicrobials
covering most prominent Staphylococci and complete
hardware removal. Percutaneous removal of hardware
must be preferred in all cases and particularly in
patients with vegetation <20 mm in diameter. The
duration of antimicrobial therapy should be two to
four weeks in patients with vegetation diagnosed at the extracted lead tip after complete hardware
removal, whereas four to six weeks in patients with
endocardial lesions. Blood cultures should be negative
for at least 14 days to implant a new device in patients
with valvular endocarditis who indicate CIED. In
cases of other situations, blood cultures should be
negative for at least 72 hours before the placement
of a new device. To prevent CIED-related infections,
a single dose of cefazolin prophylaxis just before the
implantation of CIED is recommended, additional
doses are not required.[69,70,412-432] Management of
suspected CIED infections, management of bacteremia
without evidence of CIED infection, and management
of suspected pocket infection are shown in Figures 4,
5, and 6, respectively.
What are the critical topics in the management
of patients with non-CIED related right-sided
endocarditis (IVDU)?
Right-sided endocarditis is most common among
intravenous drug users (IVDUs). The incidence of IE
related to IVDU is going to be increased in parallel
with the increasing prevalence of IVDU in Turkey
and globally. It is not necessary to make TEE as TTE can easily visualize the tricuspid valve anatomy and
its pathology in those patients. Infective endocarditis
is mostly right-sided among IVDU, and S. aureus
is the most common pathogen. The most prominent
symptoms of IE among IVDU are fever and pulmonary
symptoms mimicking respiratory tract infections. It
is not possible to use short term (two-week duration)
treatment modality in the treatment of right-sided
endocarditis among IVDU due to MSSA in our country
as anti-Staphylococcal penicillins are not currently
available. Instead, these patients must be treated with
cefazolin for a duration of four to six weeks. Oral
combination therapy with ciprofloxacin and rifampin
can be used for the treatment of uncomplicated
right-side endocarditis in IVDUs caused by strains
susceptible to both drugs; however, this approach
should be reserved for special situations with the
requirement of regular post-discharge follow-up
patients in which conventional IV antibiotic therapy
is not possible, or it is undesirable due to problems
during their hospital stay. The increasing quinolone
resistance among S. aureus strains may limit the use
of this approach.[65,138,433-443]
Figure 4: Management of suspected CIED infection.
CIED: Cardiac implantable electronic devices; Antimicrobial therapy should be at least 4-6 weeks for endocarditis (4 weeks for native valve, 6 weeks for prosthetic valve
or staphylococcal valvular endocarditis). If lead vegetation is present in the absence of a valve vegetation, 4 weeks of antibiotics for Staphylococcus aureus and 2 weeks for
other pathogens is recommended.* Usually the contralateral side; a subcutaneous ICD may also be considered; ** 2010 AHA CIED Infection Update distinguishes between
pocket infection and erosion.[70,415]
Figure 5: Management of bacteremia without evidence of CIED infection.
CIED: Cardiac implantable electronic devices; * Important to distinguish between blood stream infection and contamination in bacteremia involving skin flora.[70,415]
Figure 6: Management of suspected pocket infection.[70,413,415]
What are the critical topics in the management
of healthcare-associated IE?
At least a quarter of IE cases are healthcareassociated
endocarditis at present. It is classified as
nosocomial endocarditis, if it develops during the
hospital stay or within six months after discharge. It
is named as non-nosocomial healthcare-associated
endocarditis, when the patient is exposed to health care
interventions (i.e., hemodialysis, chemotherapy) outside
the hospital within 30 days before the onset of signs or
symptoms consistent with IE. Infective endocarditis
has to be well-classified as community-acquired,
nosocomial, or non-nosocomial healthcare-associated
IE on admission, since the choices of empirical therapy
are entirely different for healthcare-associated IE and
community-acquired IE.[4,22,83,84,444-449]
What are the critical topics in the management
of IE in HIV-infected patients?
Infective endocarditis among HIV-infected patients
is common, particularly among IVDUs with HIV
infection. The risk of developing IE is not increased
in HIV-infected patients without IVDU. The IE
incidence is higher among HIV-positive than HIVnegative
IVDU. The development of IE is more
natural compared to immunocompetent patients, and
the mortality rate is higher in patients with lower CD4+
T lymphocyte count. The morbidity and mortality
rate of cardiovascular surgery is similar in IE of both
HIV-positive and HIV-negative IVDU. The decision for valvular replacement has to be individualized in
case of a repetitive risk of IE in patients due to the
continuing habit of IVDU.[74,450-464]
What are the critical topics of IE in elderly
patients?
Infective endocarditis has become more widespread
in elderly patients. The clinical presentation is more
silent in older patients with smaller vegetations
and less embolic events. Healthcare-associated
endocarditis is more common among older patients,
as they have more prosthetic materials compared
to younger patients. The causative pathogens are
either Staphylococci acquired by healthcare or
Streptococcus gallolyticus ( Streptococcus bovis
biotype I) or enterococci related to the intestinal or
urinary source. Infective endocarditis in the elderly is
more fatal than younger patients. The best explanation
for the higher mortality rates among elderly is to have
less likely surgery, when needed. Additionally, the
antimicrobial treatment is unique in older patients
with an increased risk of severe side effects and
drug-drug interactions. A team involving a geriatric
physician, a cardiologist, a cardiovascular surgeon,
and an infectious disease specialist is essential to
advocate for deciding diagnostic and therapeutic
strategies in older patients with IE to accomplish
these difficulties.[4,24,30,143,465-473]
What are the critical topics of IE observed in
solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients?
The risk for IE is higher in SOT recipients than the
general population, and IE is frequently overlooked.
Gram-negative cocci and fungi can be the causative
pathogens beside well-known classical pathogens such
as taphylococci. If either the source of any bacteremia
or fungemia is not known or a new embolic event
occurs in SOT recipients, IE should be kept in mind in
the differential diagnosis.[4,5,7,8,79,80,474-485]
What are the critical topics in the management
of IE in patients with chronic renal failure and
among patients receiving chronic hemodialysis?
Although all patients with chronic renal failure are
at an increased risk of IE, the risk is highest among
hemodialysis patients. The most important two factors
to explain this situation are the increased prevalence
of bacteremia and cardiac valvular calcifications
occurring in hemodialysis patients. Nowadays, chronic
hemodialysis patients comprise 10 to 20% of patients
with IE, and IE occurs in 1 to 3% of patients with
chronic hemodialysis. Left-sided endocarditis, with
the involvement of the mitral valve, is common in
patients with chronic renal failure. The most common pathogen is S. aureus. The risk of surgery and the risk
of developing complications such as embolization is
higher in this population. However, valvular surgery
can be both feasible and beneficial in appropriately
selected patients in whom guideline recommendations
can be applied as well. There is no significant
difference in the survival rates between the biological
valve and the prosthetic valve replaced patients. The
bioprosthetic valve is supposed to be more rational due
to the increased tendency to hemorrhage and difficulty
in long term anticoagulation among elderly with a
short life expectancy.[77,78,486-498]
What are the critical topics in the management
of the patient with endocarditis in the ICU?
The conditions predisposing to IE should be
investigated in patients with ICU admission with
acute heart failure, sepsis, and cranial or peripheral
embolic events. Infective endocarditis should be
in the differential diagnosis in those susceptible
patients when a heart murmur is heard during the
physical examination, and appropriate empirical
treatment should be initiated promptly, if necessary.
The echocardiographic examination should be
performed to rule out the diagnosis of IE in ICU
patients with persistent fever and continuing blood
culture positivity, despite appropriate antimicrobial
treatment.[65,499-524]
What are the critical topics in the management
of IE in pregnant women?
The IE risk is not increased in pregnant women.
However, if IE develops in a pregnant woman
with a predisposing condition, the timing of both
cardiovascular surgery and delivery should be
decided by a multidisciplinary team composed of a
cardiologist, a cardiovascular surgeon, an obstetrician,
and a neonatologist. Cardiovascular surgery
is not recommended for the first two trimesters.
Cardiovascular surgery following an elective cesarean
section is preferred after 28 gestation weeks. Emergent
surgery must be planned, despite its higher fetal
mortality in case of IE leading to acute heart failure.
The principles of antimicrobial therapy for severe
infections in pregnant women are also valid for
pregnant women with IE.[104,525-530]
Should cancer screening be done in patients with
IE?
As the risk of colon cancer is higher in patients
with Streptococcus gallolyticus ( Streptococcus bovis
biotype I) endocarditis, colonoscopy is recommended
for those patients. Colonoscopy should be considered in patients with enterococcal endocarditis, even if the
source of infection has not been identified. Cancer
patients are in the higher risk group for the acquisition
of healthcare-associated endocarditis, as they are
more exposed to invasive procedures and as they need
intensive healthcare. The probability of IE should be
kept in mind and diagnostic work-up should be done,
when cancer patients have a fever of unknown origin or
a persistent fever.[531-536]
ANTITHROMBOTIC THERAPY IN IE
Which antithrombotic agents in which indications
should be used in patients with IE and how?
All antithrombotic therapy should be ceased in
case of severe intracranial hemorrhage in patients
with IE who already on oral anticoagulants for their
prosthetic valves. However, it is recommended to
initiate parenteral anticoagulation as soon as possible
for these patients. Ongoing oral anticoagulants must be
shifted to the parenteral route in case of an ischemic
neurological event without hemorrhage in patients
with IE. It is essential to make all decisions following
multidisciplinary discussion.[181,537,538]
PREVENTION OF IE
How and in what situations should antimicrobial
prophylaxis be done in patients with IE?
Antimicrobial prophylaxis is only being
recommended before invasive dental procedures in
patients at the highest risk for the acquisition of IE
(previous IE, presence of prosthetic heart valve or
ring annuloplasty, cyanotic congenital heart disease
and cardiac allograft valvulopathy). A single dose of
2 g amoxicillin or 600 mg clindamycin given orally
one hour before the procedure is recommended as
prophylaxis.
Patients with IE should be examined by the dentist to be sure of the probable dental source of infection, and if a probable source is existing, it must eliminated. An additional dose of prophylactic antimicrobial agent, preferably selecting a different class of antibiotic to cover whole probable pathogens should be given one hour before the procedure to those patients who have already been receiving appropriate antimicrobials for their IE.[3,17,25,58,61,65,66,269,376,539-567]
What is recommended to high-risk patients for
IE about their oral and dental hygiene?
High-risk patients to develop IE should seek
professional dental care twice a year, whereas
intermediate-risk patients should have it annually.[65]
What are the other measures in the prevention
of IE?
Central venous catheters should not be placed
to patients with the risk of IE, unless required. If
catheterization is necessary, the catheter should be,
then, inserted using an aseptic technique and maximal
sterile barrier precautions, including the use of a
cap, mask, sterile gown, sterile gloves, and a sterile
full-body drape. Anti-staphylococcal therapy for five
and seven days is recommended for patients with a
predisposing condition for the acquisition of IE, if
S. aureus is isolated from their removed intra-venous
catheter"s tip culture. There has been no vaccine
available in clinical use to prevent IE recently. The
procedures breaching the skin integrity like tattoos and
body piercing should be avoided. Nose picking should
be avoided to prevent the nasal carriage of S. aureus
and transient bacteremia, if S. aureus nasal carriage is
already present.
The Stöckert 3T heater-cooler system devices manufactured in the years between 2006 and 2014 are known to be contaminated with M. chimera and should not be used at the cardiovascular surgery centers, if particularly either prosthetic valve or vascular graft will be replaced.[65,102,121,568-585]
Infective Endocarditis and Other Cardiovascular
Infections Study Group
Özlem Azap, Seniha Başaran, Yasemin Çağ, Atahan
Çağatay, Güle Çınar, Sibel Doğan-Kaya, Lokman Hızmalı,
Mehmet Emirhan Işık, Nirgül Kılıçaslan, Şirin Menekşe, Meliha
Meriç-Koç, Serpil Öztürk, Ayfer Şensoy, Yasemin Tezer-Tekçe,
Elif Tükenmez-Tigen, Yeşim Uygun-Kızmaz, Mutlu Şeyda
Velioğlu-Öcalmaz, Ayşegül Yeşilkaya, Emel Yılmaz, Neziha
Yılmaz, Fatma Yılmaz-Karadağ
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to
the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research
and/or authorship of this article.
1) Bin Abdulhak AA, Baddour LM, Erwin PJ, Hoen B, Chu
VH, Mensah GA, et al. Global and regional burden of
infective endocarditis, 1990-2010: a systematic review of
the literature. Glob Heart 2014;9:131-43.
2) Cahill TJ, Prendergast BD. Infective endocarditis. Lancet
2016;387:882-93.
3) Baddour LM, Wilson WR, Bayer AS, Fowler VG Jr, Tleyjeh
IM, Rybak MJ, et al. Infective Endocarditis in Adults:
Diagnosis, Antimicrobial Therapy, and Management of
Complications: A Scientific Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association.
Circulation 2015;132:1435-86.
4) Şimşek-Yavuz S, Şensoy A, Kaşıkçıoğlu H, Çeken S,
Deniz D, Yavuz A, et al. Infective endocarditis in Turkey:
aetiology, clinical features, and analysis of risk factors for
mortality in 325 cases. Int J Infect Dis 2015;30:106-14.
5) Hoen B, Duval X. Clinical practice. Infective endocarditis.
N Engl J Med 2013;368:1425-33.
6) Seckeler MD, Hoke TR. The worldwide epidemiology of
acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease. Clin
Epidemiol 2011;3:67-84.
7) Tibazarwa KB, Volmink JA, Mayosi BM. Incidence of
acute rheumatic fever in the world: a systematic review of
population-based studies. Heart 2008;94:1534-40.
8) Allegranzi B, Bagheri Nejad S, Combescure C,
Graafmans W, Attar H, Donaldson L, et al. Burden of
endemic health-care-associated infection in developing
countries: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet
2011;377:228-41.
9) Köse MR. Sağlık İstatistikleri Yıllığı 2015. Ankara: Sağlık
Bakanlığı Sağlık Araştırmaları Genel Müdürlüğü; 2016.
10) Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu. Faaliyet Raporu 2015.
Ankara: Sağlık Bakanlığı; 2016.
11) Gümüşlü F, Özkara Ş, Özkan S, Baykal F, Güllü Ü.
Türkiye"de Verem Savaşı, 2007 Raporu. Ankara: Sağlık
Bakanlığı Verem Savaşı Dairesi Başkanlığı; 2007.
12) Kandemir Ö. Bruselloz. Turkiye Klinikleri J Inf Dis-
Special Topics 2015;8:1-9.
13) Kaura A, Dworakowska D, Dworakowski R. Infective
endocarditis - Cinderella in cardiology. Kardiol Pol
2017;75:965-74.
14) Naderi HR, Sheybani F, Erfani SS. Errors in diagnosis of
infective endocarditis. Epidemiol Infect 2018;146:394-400.
15) Başaran S, Şimşek-Yavuz S, Alp E, Keskin Ç, Çağatay A,
Öncül O ve ark. İnfektif endokarditin tanınamaması, tanısının
gecikmesi ve sonuçları. In: Tekin S, editör. XX. Türk Klinik
Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları Kongresi (13-16 Mart
2019, Antalya) Kitabı. İstanbul: Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve
İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları Derneği; 2019. s. 266-7.
16) Aydın M, Azap Ö, Şimşek-Yavuz S. İnfektif endokardit
tanı ve tedavi olanaklarının belirlenmesi: neyi, ne kadar
yapabiliyoruz. In: Tekin S, editör. Klimik 2016: 30. Yıl
Kurultayı (9-12 Mart 2016, Antalya) Özet Kitabı. İstanbul:
Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları
Derneği; 2016. s. 450-1.
17) Yılmaz-Karadağ F, Şimşek-Yavuz S, Karadeniz A, Aydın
Ö, Ergen P, Tükenmez-Tigen E ve ark. Diş hekimlerinin
infektif endokardit profilaksisi hakkinda bilgi düzeylerinin
değerlendirilmesi: ön çalışma verileri. In: Tekin S, editör.
Klimik 2016: 30. Yıl Kurultayı (9-12 Mart 2016, Antalya) Özet
Kitabı. İstanbul: Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon
Hastalıkları Derneği; 2016. s. 292-3.
18) Tissot-Dupont H, Casalta JP, Gouriet F, Hubert S, Salaun
E, Habib G, et al. International experts' practice in the
antibiotic therapy of infective endocarditis is not following
the guidelines. Clin Microbiol Infect 2017;23:736-9.
19) Cresti A, Chiavarelli M, Scalese M, Nencioni C, Valentini
S, Guerrini F, et al. Epidemiological and mortality trends in infective endocarditis, a 17-year population-based
prospective study. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther 2017;7:27-35.
20) Slipczuk L, Codolosa JN, Davila CD, Romero-Corral
A, Yun J, Pressman GS, et al. Infective endocarditis
epidemiology over five decades: a systematic review. PLoS
One 2013;8:e82665.
21) Holland TL, Baddour LM, Bayer AS, Hoen B, Miro JM,
Fowler VG Jr. Infective endocarditis. Nat Rev Dis Primers
2016;2:16059.
22) Toyoda N, Chikwe J, Itagaki S, Gelijns AC, Adams DH,
Egorova NN. Trends in Infective Endocarditis in California
and New York State, 1998-2013. JAMA 2017;317:1652-60.
23) Murdoch DR, Corey GR, Hoen B, Miró JM, Fowler VG
Jr, Bayer AS, et al. Clinical presentation, etiology, and
outcome of infective endocarditis in the 21st century: the
International Collaboration on Endocarditis-Prospective
Cohort Study. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:463-73.
24) Selton-Suty C, Célard M, Le Moing V, Doco-Lecompte T,
Chirouze C, Iung B, et al. Preeminence of Staphylococcus
aureus in infective endocarditis: a 1-year population-based
survey. Clin Infect Dis 2012;54:1230-9.
25) Duval X, Delahaye F, Alla F, Tattevin P, Obadia JF, Le
Moing V, et al. Temporal trends in infective endocarditis
in the context of prophylaxis guideline modifications: three
successive population-based surveys. J Am Coll Cardiol
2012;59:1968-76.
26) Hoen B, Alla F, Selton-Suty C, Béguinot I, Bouvet A,
Briançon S, et al. Changing profile of infective endocarditis:
results of a 1-year survey in France. JAMA 2002;288:75-81.
27) Cahill TJ, Baddour LM, Habib G, Hoen B, Salaun E,
Pettersson GB, et al. Challenges in Infective Endocarditis.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:325-44.
28) Fatima S, Dao B, Jameel A, Sharma K, Strogatz D,
Scribani M, et al. Epidemiology of Infective Endocarditis
in Rural Upstate New York, 2011 - 2016. J Clin Med Res
2017;9:754-8.
29) Cetinkaya Y, Akova M, Akalin HE, Aşçioğlu S, Hayran M,
Uzuns O, et al. A retrospective review of 228 episodes of
infective endocarditis where rheumatic valvular disease is
still common. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2001;18:1-7.
30) Leblebicioglu H, Yilmaz H, Tasova Y, Alp E, Saba R,
Caylan R, et al. Characteristics and analysis of risk factors
for mortality in infective endocarditis. Eur J Epidemiol
2006;21:25-31.
31) Elbey MA, Akdağ S, Kalkan ME, Kaya MG, Sayın MR,
Karapınar H, et al. A multicenter study on experience of
13 tertiary hospitals in Turkey in patients with infective
endocarditis. Anadolu Kardiyol Derg 2013;13:523-7.
32) Cancan Gursul N, Vardar I, Demirdal T, Gursul E, Ural S,
Yesil M. Clinical and microbiological findings of infective
endocarditis. J Infect Dev Ctries 2016;10:478-87.
33) Zencir C, Akpek M, Senol S, Selvi M, Onay S, Cetin M,
et al. Association between hematologic parameters and
in-hospital mortality in patients with infective endocarditis.
Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2015;31:632-8.
34) Tuğcu A, Yildirimtürk O, Baytaroğlu C, Kurtoğlu H,
Köse O, Sener M, et al. Clinical spectrum, presentation,
and risk factors for mortality in infective endocarditis:
a review of 68 cases at a tertiary care center in Turkey.
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars 2009;37:9-18.
35) Sucu M, Davutoğlu V, Ozer O, Aksoy M. Epidemiological,
clinical and microbiological profile of infective endocarditis
in a tertiary hospital in the South-East Anatolia Region.
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars 2010;38:107-11.
36) Heper G, Yorukoglu Y. Clinical, bacteriologic and
echocardiographic evaluation of infective endocarditis in
Ankara, Turkey. Angiology 2002;53:191-7.
37) Agca FV, Demircan N, Peker T, Ari H, Karaagac K,
Ozluk OA, et al. Infective endocarditis: a tertiary referral
centre experience from Turkey. Int J Clin Exp Med
2015;8:13962-8.
38) Işıkgöz-Taşbakan M, Guliyeva G, Kayıkçıoğlu M,
Yamazhan T, Özcem S, Pullukçu H ve ark. Enfektif
endokardit: 100 hastanin değerlendirilmesi. In: 32. Ankem
Akılcı Antibiyotik Kullanımı Kongresi (10-14 Mayıs 2017,
Antalya) Kitabı. İstanbul: Antibiyotik ve Kemoterapi
Derneği; 2017. s. 104.
39) Erbay AR, Erbay A, Canga A, Keskin G, Sen N, Atak R,
et al. Risk factors for in-hospital mortality in infective
endocarditis: five years' experience at a tertiary care
hospital in Turkey. J Heart Valve Dis 2010;19:216-24.
40) Akıl MA, Acet H, Elbey MA, Aydın M, Bilik Z, Yıldız A,
et al. Prognostic factors and in-hospital outcome of native
valve endocarditis in Turkey. A multicenter study. Acta
Medica Mediterranea 2014;30:1035-9.
41) Adademir T, Tuncer EY, Tas S, Donmez AA, Polat EB,
Tuncer A. Surgical treatment of aortic valve endocarditis:
a 26-year experience. Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc
2014;29:16-24.
42) Cay S, Gürel OM, Korkmaz S. Clinical and epidemiological
characteristics of infective endocarditis. Turk Kardiyol
Dern Ars 2009;37:182-6.
43) Turak O, Canpolat U, Ozcan F, Yayla C, Mendi MA, Oksüz
F, et al. D-dimer level predicts in-hospital mortality in
patients with infective endocarditis: a prospective singlecentre
study. Thromb Res 2014;134:587-92.
44) Ozveren O, Oztürk MA, Sengül C, Bakal RB, Akgün T,
Izgi C, et al. Infective endocarditis and complications;
a single center experience. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars.
2014;42:629-34.
45) Kocabaş U, Kaya E, Özerkan-Çakan F. Microbiological
profile, echocardiographic characteristics and early results of
infective endocarditis: a review of 194 cases at a tertiary care
center in Turkey. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62(18; Suppl. 2):81.
46) Kucukates E, Gultekin N, Bagdatli Y. Cases of active
infective endocarditis in a university hospital during a
10-year period. J Pak Med Assoc 2013;63:1163-7.
47) Kaya Z, Yıldız A, Biçer-Yeşilay A, Kocaaslan A, Aydın MS,
Sezen Y, et al. Merkezimizde takip edilen her üç enfektif
endokardit olgusundan birisi Brusella endokarditidir.
Gaziantep Tıp Derg 2013;19:103-7.
48) Çaylan R, Aydın K, Kaygusuz S, Köksal İ, Örem C.
Otuziki infektif endokardit atağının değerlendirilmesi.
Flora 2001;6:267-73.
49) İnanç MT, Kaya MG, Gündüz Kaya E, Doğan A, Ardıç
İ, Doğru O. İnfektif endokardit: retrospektif olarak 27 hastanın değerlendirilmesi. Tıp Araştırmaları Derg
2007;5:91-9.
50) Şimşek-Yavuz S, Berzeg-Deniz D, Tükenmez-Tigen E, et
al. In: Tekin S, Şimşek F, editörler. KLİMİK İEÇG Türkiye
infektif endokardit kohortu: 2015-2016 verileri. XVIII.
Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları
Kongresi (22-26 Mart 2017, Antalya) Özet Kitabı. İstanbul:
Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon Has-talıkları
Derneği; 2017. s. 133.
51) Frontera JA, Gradon JD. Right-side endocarditis in
injection drug users: review of proposed mechanisms of
pathogenesis. Clin Infect Dis 2000;30:374-9.
52) Orün UA, Ceylan O, Bilici M, Karademir S, Ocal B,
Senocak F, et al. Acute rheumatic fever in the Central
Anatolia Region of Turkey: a 30-year experience in a single
center. Eur J Pediatr 2012;171:361-8.
53) Onat A, Keleş İ, Çetinkaya A, Başar Ö, Yildirim B, Erer
B, et al. Prevalence of Coronary Mortality and Morbidity
in the Turkish Adult Risk Factor Study: 10-year Follow-up
Suggests Coronary "Epidemic". Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars
2001;29:8-19.
54) Onat A, Şurdumavcı G, Şenocak M, Örnek E, Gözükara E,
Karaaslan Y, et al. Survey on Prevalence of Cardiac Disease
and its Risk Factors in Adults in Turkey: 3. Prevalence of
Heart Diseases. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars 1991;19:26-33.
55) Demirbağ R, Sade LE, Aydın M, Bozkurt A, Acartürk E.
The Turkish registry of heart valve disease. Turk Kardiyol
Dern Ars 2013;41:1-10.
56) Watkins DA, Johnson CO, Colquhoun SM, Karthikeyan
G, Beaton A, Bukhman G, et al. Global, Regional, and
National Burden of Rheumatic Heart Disease, 1990-2015.
N Engl J Med 2017;377:713-22.
57) Marijon E, Mirabel M, Celermajer DS, Jouven X. Rheumatic
heart disease. Lancet 2012;379:953-64.
58) Baskerville CA, Hanrahan BB, Burke AJ, Holwell AJ,
Rémond MG, Maguire GP. Infective endocarditis and
rheumatic heart disease in the north of Australia. Heart
Lung Circ 2012;21:36-41.
59) Katan O, Michelena HI, Avierinos JF, Mahoney DW,
DeSimone DC, Baddour LM, et al. Incidence and predictors
of infective endocarditis in mitral valve prolapse: A
population-based study. Mayo Clin Proc 2016;91:336-42.
60) Zegri-Reiriz I, de Alarcón A, Muñoz P, Martínez Sellés M,
González-Ramallo V, Miro JM, et al. Infective endocarditis
in patients with bicuspid aortic valve or mitral valve
prolapse. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;71:2731-40.
61) Baumgartner H. Infective endocarditis in adults with
congenital heart disease: is it time to change our approach
to prophylaxis based on new insights into risk prediction?
Eur Heart J 2011;32:1835-7.
62) Mylotte D, Rushani D, Therrien J, Guo L, Liu A, Guo
K, et al. Incidence, Predictors, and Mortality of Infective
Endocarditis in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease
Without Prosthetic Valves. Am J Cardiol 2017;120:2278-83.
63) Li Y, Wei X, Zhao Z, Liao Y, He J, Xiong T, et al.
Prevalence and complications of bicuspid aortic valve in
chinese according to echocardiographic database. Am J
Cardiol 2017;120:287-91.
64) Regueiro A, Linke A, Latib A, Ihlemann N, Urena M,
Walther T, et al. Association between transcatheter aortic
valve replacement and subsequent infective endocarditis
and in-hospital death. JAMA 2016;316:1083-92.
65) Habib G, Lancellotti P, Antunes MJ, Bongiorni MG,
Casalta JP, Del Zotti F, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the
management of infective endocarditis: The Task Force for
the Management of Infective Endocarditis of the European
Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: European
Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the
European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM). Eur
Heart J 2015;36:3075-128.
66) SEC Working Group for the ESC 2015 Guidelines on the
Management of Infective Endocarditis; Expert Reviewers
for the ESC 2015 Guidelines on the Management of
Infective Endocarditis; SEC Guidelines Committee.
Comments on the ESC 2015 Guidelines for the
Management of Infective Endocarditis. Rev Esp Cardiol
(Engl Ed) 2016;69:7-10.
67) Amat-Santos IJ, Ribeiro HB, Urena M, Allende R, Houde
C, Bédard E, et al. Prosthetic valve endocarditis after
transcatheter valve replacement: a systematic review. JACC
Cardiovasc Interv 2015;8:334-46.
68) Sandoe JA, Barlow G, Chambers JB, Gammage M, Guleri
A, Howard P, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis, prevention
and management of implantable cardiac electronic device
infection. Report of a joint Working Party project on behalf
of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
(BSAC, host organization), British Heart Rhythm Society
(BHRS), British Cardiovascular Society (BCS), British
Heart Valve Society (BHVS) and British Society for
Echocardiography (BSE). J Antimicrob Chemother
2015;70:325-59.
69) Johansen JB, Jørgensen OD, Møller M, Arnsbo P, Mortensen
PT, Nielsen JC. Infection after pacemaker implantation:
infection rates and risk factors associated with infection
in a population-based cohort study of 46299 consecutive
patients. Eur Heart J 2011;32:991-8.
70) Baddour LM, Epstein AE, Erickson CC, Knight BP,
Levison ME, Lockhart PB, et al. Update on cardiovascular
implantable electronic device infections and their
management: a scientific statement from the American
Heart Association. Circulation 2010;121:458-77.
71) Aydin M, Yildiz A, Kaya Z, Kaya Z, Basarir AO,
Cakmak N, et al. Clinical Characteristics and Outcome of
Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infections in
Turkey. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2016;22:459-64.
72) Hannan MM, Husain S, Mattner F, Danziger-Isakov L,
Drew RJ, Corey GR, et al. Working formulation for the
standardization of definitions of infections in patients
using ventricular assist devices. J Heart Lung Transplant
2011;30:375-84.
73) Kusne S, Staley L, Arabia F. Prevention and Infection
Management in Mechanical Circulatory Support Device
Recipients. Clin Infect Dis 2017;64:222-8.
74) Wilson LE, Thomas DL, Astemborski J, Freedman TL,
Vlahov D. Prospective study of infective endocarditis
among injection drug users. J Infect Dis 2002;185:1761-6.
75) Keeshin SW, Feinberg J. Endocarditis as a Marker for
New Epidemics of Injection Drug Use. Am J Med Sci
2016;352:609-14.
76) Wurcel AG, Anderson JE, Chui KK, Skinner S, Knox TA,
Snydman DR, et al. Increasing Infectious Endocarditis
Admissions Among Young People Who Inject Drugs. Open
Forum Infect Dis 2016;3:ofw157.
77) Díaz-García HR, Contreras-de la Torre NA, Alemán-
Villalobos A, et al. Infective endocarditis in end-stage
renal disease patients in developing countries: what is the
real problem? In: Firstenberg MS, editor. Contemporary
Challenges in Endocarditis. Lon-don: IntechOpen; 2016.
p. 121-42.
78) Chaudry MS, Carlson N, Gislason GH, Kamper AL, Rix
M, Fowler VG Jr, et al. Risk of infective endocarditis
in patients with end stage renal disease. Clin J Am Soc
Nephrol 2017;12:1814-22.
79) Ruttmann E, Bonatti H, Legit C, Ulmer H, Stelzmueller
I, Antretter H, et al. Severe endocarditis in transplant
recipients--an epidemiologic study. Transpl Int
2005;18:690-6.
80) Paterson DL, Dominguez EA, Chang FY, Snydman DR,
Singh N. Infective endocarditis in solid organ transplant
recipients. Clin Infect Dis 1998;26:689-94.
81) Olmos C, Vilacosta I, Fernández C, Sarriá C, López J, Del
Trigo M, et al. Comparison of clinical features of left-sided
infective endocarditis involving previously normal versus
previously abnormal valves. Am J Cardiol 2014;114:278-83.
82) Fowler VG Jr, Miro JM, Hoen B, Cabell CH, Abrutyn E,
Rubinstein E, et al. Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis: a
consequence of medical progress. JAMA 2005;293:3012-21.
83) Lomas JM, Martínez-Marcos FJ, Plata A, Ivanova R, Gálvez
J, Ruiz J, et al. Healthcare-associated infective endocarditis:
an undesirable effect of healthcare universalization. Clin
Microbiol Infect 2010;16:1683-90.
84) Fernández-Hidalgo N, Almirante B, Tornos P, Pigrau C,
Sambola A, Igual A, et al. Contemporary epidemiology and
prognosis of health care-associated infective endocarditis.
Clin Infect Dis 2008;47:1287-97.
85) Ambrosioni J, Hernandez-Meneses M, Téllez A, Pericàs J,
Falces C, Tolosana JM, et al. The changing epidemiology
of infective endocarditis in the twenty-first century. Curr
Infect Dis Rep 2017;19:21.
86) Fowler VG, Scheld WM, Bayer AS. Endocarditis and
intravascular infections. In: Bennett JE, Dolin R, Blaser
MJ, editors. Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett"s Principles
and Practice of Infectious Diseases. 8th ed. Philadelphia:
Elsevier Saunders; 2015. p. 990-1028.
87) Sabe MA, Shrestha NK, Gordon S, Menon V. Staphylococcus
lugdunensis: a rare but destructive cause of coagulasenegative
staphylococcus infective endocarditis. Eur Heart J
Acute Cardiovasc Care 2014;3:275-80.
88) Şimşek-Yavuz S, Başaran S , Aliyev V, Midilli K, Çağatay
A, Özsüt H, et al. Diphtheroids in blood cultures could
be streptococcus mutans: A case of infective endocarditis
diagnosed after 16 months. Klimik Dergisi 2015;28:122-5.
89) Şimşek Yavuz S, Eren M, Yavuz A, Biçer Y, Koçak F, Bilgen
F, et al. İnfektif endokardit: 58 olgunun değerlendirilmesi.
Klimik Derg 2003;16:55-62.
90) Schlegel L, Grimont F, Ageron E, Grimont PA, Bouvet
A. Reappraisal of the taxonomy of the Streptococcus
bovis/Streptococcus equinus complex and related species:
description of Streptococcus gallolyticus subsp. gallolyticus
subsp. nov., S. gallolyticus subsp. macedonicus subsp. nov.
and S. gallolyticus subsp. pasteurianus subsp. nov. Int J Syst
Evol Microbiol 2003;53:631-45.
91) Boleij A, Muytjens CM, Bukhari SI, Cayet N, Glaser P,
Hermans PW, et al. Novel clues on the specific association
of Streptococcus gallolyticus subsp gallolyticus with
colorectal cancer. J Infect Dis 2011;203:1101-9.
92) Boleij A, van Gelder MM, Swinkels DW, Tjalsma H.
Clinical Importance of Streptococcus gallolyticus infection
among colorectal cancer patients: systematic review and
meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2011;53:870-8.
93) Corredoira-Sánchez J, García-Garrote F, Rabuñal
R, López-Roses L, García-País MJ, Castro E, et al.
Association between bacteremia due to Streptococcus
gallolyticus subsp. gallolyticus (Streptococcus bovis I)
and colorectal neoplasia: a case-control study. Clin Infect
Dis 2012;55:491-6.
94) Kumar R, Herold JL, Taylor J, Xu J, Xu Y. Variations among
Streptococcus gallolyticus subsp. gallolyticus strains in
connection with colorectal cancer. Sci Rep 2018;8:1514.
95) Kumar R, Herold JL, Schady D, Davis J, Kopetz S,
Martinez-Moczygemba M, et al. Streptococcus gallolyticus
subsp. gallolyticus promotes colorectal tumor development.
PLoS Pathog 2017;13:e1006440.
96) Dahl A, Lauridsen TK, Arpi M, Sørensen LL, Østergaard
C, Sogaard P, et al. Risk factors of endocarditis in patients
with enterococcus faecalis bacteremia: External validation
of the NOVA score. Clin Infect Dis 2016;63:771-5.
97) Bouza E, Kestler M, Beca T, Mariscal G, Rodríguez-
Créixems M, Bermejo J, et al. The NOVA score: a proposal
to reduce the need for transesophageal echocardiography
in patients with enterococcal bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis
2015;60:528-35.
98) Berge A, Krantz A, Östlund H, Nauclér P, Rasmussen
M. The DENOVA score efficiently identifies patients
with monomicrobial Enterococcus faecalis bacteremia
where echocardiography is not necessary. Infection
2019;47:45-50.
99) Chirouze C, Athan E, Alla F, Chu VH, Ralph Corey
G, Selton-Suty C, et al. Enterococcal endocarditis in
the beginning of the 21st century: analysis from the
International Collaboration on Endocarditis-Prospective
Cohort Study. Clin Microbiol Infect 2013;19:1140-7.
100) Komiyama EY, Lepesqueur LS, Yassuda CG,
Samaranayake LP, Parahitiyawa NB, Balducci I, et al.
Enterococcus species in the oral cavity: Prevalence,
virulence factors and antimicrobial susceptibility. PLoS
One 2016;11:e0163001.
101) Pericàs JM, Corredoira J, Moreno A, García-País MJ, Falces
C, Rabuñal R, et al. Relationship between enterococcus
faecalis infective endocarditis and colorectal neoplasm:
Preliminary results from a cohort of 154 patients. Rev Esp
Cardiol (Engl Ed) 2017;70:451-8.
102) Şimşek-Yavuz S. İnfektif endokardit: Güncel bilgiler.
Klimik Derg 2015;28:46-67.
103) Koruk ST, Erdem H, Koruk I, Erbay A, Tezer-Tekce Y, Erbay
AR, et al. Management of Brucella endocarditis: results of
the Gulhane study. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2012;40:145-50.
104) Gilbert DN, Chambers HF, Eliopoulos GM, Saag MS,
Pavia AT, editors. The Sanford Guide to Antimicrobial
Therapy 2019. 49th ed. Sperryville, VA: Antimicrobial
Therapy, Inc.; 2019.
105) Chambers ST, Murdoch D, Morris A, Holland D, Pappas
P, Almela M, et al. HACEK infective endocarditis:
characteristics and outcomes from a large, multi-national
cohort. PLoS One 2013;8:e63181.
106) Lützen L, Olesen B, Voldstedlund M, Christensen JJ, Moser
C, Knudsen JD, et al. Incidence of HACEK bacteraemia in
Denmark: A 6-year population-based study. Int J Infect Dis
2018;68:83-7.
107) Revest M, Egmann G, Cattoir V, Tattevin P. HACEK
endocarditis: state-of-the-art. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther
2016;14:523-30.
108) Morpeth S, Murdoch D, Cabell CH, Karchmer AW, Pappas
P, Levine D, et al. Non-HACEK gram-negative bacillus
endocarditis. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:829-35.
109) Falcone M, Tiseo G, Durante-Mangoni E, Ravasio V,
Barbaro F, Ursi MP, et al. Risk Factors and Outcomes
of Endocarditis Due to Non-HACEK Gram-Negative
Bacilli: Data from the Prospective Multicenter Italian
Endocarditis Study Cohort. Antimicrob Agents Chemother
2018;62:pii:e02208-17.
110) San Román JA, Vilacosta I, López J, Sarriá C. Critical
questions about left-sided infective endocarditis. J Am Coll
Cardiol 2015;66:1068-76.
111) Fournier PE, Thuny F, Richet H, Lepidi H, Casalta JP,
Arzouni JP, et al. Comprehensive diagnostic strategy for
blood culture-negative endocarditis: a prospective study of
819 new cases. Clin Infect Dis 2010;51:131-40.
112) Houpikian P, Raoult D. Blood culture-negative endocarditis
in a reference center: etiologic diagnosis of 348 cases.
Medicine (Baltimore) 2005;84:162-73.
113) Geissdörfer W, Moos V, Moter A, Loddenkemper C,
Jansen A, Tandler R, et al. High frequency of tropheryma
whipplei in culture-negative endocarditis. J Clin Microbiol
2012;50:216-22.
114) Million M, Thuny F, Richet H, Raoult D. Long-term
outcome of Q fever endocarditis: a 26-year personal survey.
Lancet Infect Dis 2010;10:527-35.
115) Şimşek Yavuz S, Özbek E, Başaran S, Çelebi B, Yılmaz
E, Başaran M, et al. The first case of chronic Q fever
endocarditis and aortitis from Turkey: A 5-year infection
before diagnosis with drain in sternum. Anatol J Cardiol
2016;16:814-6.
116) Şimşek-Yavuz S, Başaran S, Yılmaz E, Keskin Ç, Alp
E, Kılıç S ve ark. İnfektif endokardit tanısına serolojik
incelemelerin ve PET/BT"nin katkıları. In: Tekin S, editör.
XX. Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları
Kongresi (13-16 Mart 2019, Antalya) Kitabı. İstanbul: Türk
Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon Hastalıkları Derneği;
2019. s. 224-5.
117) Özdemir S. Nadir Rastlanan Enfektif Endokardit
Etkenlerinin Araştırılması: HACEK Grubu
Mikroorganizmalar, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, Coxiella
Türleri ve Bartonella Türleri [Doktora Tezi]. İstanbul:
İstanbul Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü; 2012.
118) Karaman İN, Azizy A, Yılmaz Ş, Tükenmez-Tigen E,
Odabaşı Z, Söyletir G ve ark. Bir kültür negatif doğal kapak
endokarditi etkeni olarak Bartonella quintana. In: Tekin
S, editör. XX. Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon
Hastalıkları Kongresi (13-16 Mart 2019, Antalya) Kitabı.
İstanbul: Türk Klinik Mikrobiyoloji ve İnfeksiyon
Hastalıkları Derneği; 2019. s. 321-2.
119) Liesman RM, Pritt BS, Maleszewski JJ, Patel R. Laboratory
diagnosis of infective endocarditis. J Clin Microbiol
2017;55:2599-608.
120) Brusch JL. Legionnaire"s disease: Cardiac manifestations.
Infect Dis Clin North Am 2017;31:69-80.
121) Marra AR, Diekema DJ, Edmond MB. Mycobacterium
chimaera Infections Associated With Contaminated
Heater-Cooler Devices for Cardiac Surgery: Outbreak
Management. Clin Infect Dis 2017;65:669-74.
122) Şimşek-Yavuz S. Açık kalp cerrahisi uygulanmış hastalarda
kontamine isıtıcı-soğutucu cihazlarla ilişkili mycobacterium
chimaera infeksiyonları: Küresel bir salgın. Klimik Dergisi
2017;30:49-58.