Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris, Bruno Ledergerber, Jana Epprecht, Berit Siedentop, Pierre Monney, Michelle Frank, Georgios Tzimas, Nicolas Fourré, Virgile Zimmermann, Giulia Domenichini, Lars Niclauss, Matthias Kirsch, Mathias Van Hemelrijck, Omer Dzemali, Benoit Guery, Barbara Hasse
{"title":"不同版本的Duke标准在诊断心脏内假体患者感染性心内膜炎中的表现。","authors":"Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris, Bruno Ledergerber, Jana Epprecht, Berit Siedentop, Pierre Monney, Michelle Frank, Georgios Tzimas, Nicolas Fourré, Virgile Zimmermann, Giulia Domenichini, Lars Niclauss, Matthias Kirsch, Mathias Van Hemelrijck, Omer Dzemali, Benoit Guery, Barbara Hasse","doi":"10.1093/ofid/ofaf507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diagnosing infective endocarditis (IE) is a significant challenge. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of the 2015 and 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the 2023 International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) Duke clinical criteria in a cohort of patients with suspected IE and intracardiac prosthetic material.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study was conducted at 2 Swiss University Hospitals (2014-2024). The reference standard was the diagnosis of the Endocarditis Team or expert clinicians. Patients with IE (reference standard) classified as definite IE by the Duke criteria were considered true positives, while those without IE classified as rejected IE were considered true negatives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1025 episodes with suspected IE and intracardiac prosthetic material, 537 (61%) had IE. Using the 2015 ESC, 2023 ESC, and 2023 ISCVID clinical criteria, 324 (32%), 367 (36%), and 430 (42%) episodes were classified as definite IE, respectively. The sensitivity for the 2015 Duke-ESC, 2023 Duke-ESC, and 2023 Duke-ISCVID the clinical criteria was calculated to be 56% (95% CI: 52-60%), 61% (57-65%), and 71% (67-74%), respectively, while the specificity 67% (63-71%), 56% (51-61%), and 34% (29-38%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 2023 ISCVID Duke clinical criteria demonstrated the highest sensitivity for diagnosing IE compared to the 2015 and 2023 ESC Duke criteria in patients with intracardiac prosthetic material. However, this was at the expense of specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":19517,"journal":{"name":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","volume":"12 9","pages":"ofaf507"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12404897/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of Different Versions of Duke Criteria in Diagnosing Infective Endocarditis in Patients With Intracardiac Prosthetic Materials.\",\"authors\":\"Matthaios Papadimitriou-Olivgeris, Bruno Ledergerber, Jana Epprecht, Berit Siedentop, Pierre Monney, Michelle Frank, Georgios Tzimas, Nicolas Fourré, Virgile Zimmermann, Giulia Domenichini, Lars Niclauss, Matthias Kirsch, Mathias Van Hemelrijck, Omer Dzemali, Benoit Guery, Barbara Hasse\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ofid/ofaf507\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diagnosing infective endocarditis (IE) is a significant challenge. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of the 2015 and 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the 2023 International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) Duke clinical criteria in a cohort of patients with suspected IE and intracardiac prosthetic material.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study was conducted at 2 Swiss University Hospitals (2014-2024). The reference standard was the diagnosis of the Endocarditis Team or expert clinicians. Patients with IE (reference standard) classified as definite IE by the Duke criteria were considered true positives, while those without IE classified as rejected IE were considered true negatives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1025 episodes with suspected IE and intracardiac prosthetic material, 537 (61%) had IE. Using the 2015 ESC, 2023 ESC, and 2023 ISCVID clinical criteria, 324 (32%), 367 (36%), and 430 (42%) episodes were classified as definite IE, respectively. The sensitivity for the 2015 Duke-ESC, 2023 Duke-ESC, and 2023 Duke-ISCVID the clinical criteria was calculated to be 56% (95% CI: 52-60%), 61% (57-65%), and 71% (67-74%), respectively, while the specificity 67% (63-71%), 56% (51-61%), and 34% (29-38%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 2023 ISCVID Duke clinical criteria demonstrated the highest sensitivity for diagnosing IE compared to the 2015 and 2023 ESC Duke criteria in patients with intracardiac prosthetic material. However, this was at the expense of specificity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Forum Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\"12 9\",\"pages\":\"ofaf507\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12404897/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Forum Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaf507\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Forum Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaf507","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Performance of Different Versions of Duke Criteria in Diagnosing Infective Endocarditis in Patients With Intracardiac Prosthetic Materials.
Background: Diagnosing infective endocarditis (IE) is a significant challenge. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of the 2015 and 2023 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the 2023 International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) Duke clinical criteria in a cohort of patients with suspected IE and intracardiac prosthetic material.
Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at 2 Swiss University Hospitals (2014-2024). The reference standard was the diagnosis of the Endocarditis Team or expert clinicians. Patients with IE (reference standard) classified as definite IE by the Duke criteria were considered true positives, while those without IE classified as rejected IE were considered true negatives.
Results: Of the 1025 episodes with suspected IE and intracardiac prosthetic material, 537 (61%) had IE. Using the 2015 ESC, 2023 ESC, and 2023 ISCVID clinical criteria, 324 (32%), 367 (36%), and 430 (42%) episodes were classified as definite IE, respectively. The sensitivity for the 2015 Duke-ESC, 2023 Duke-ESC, and 2023 Duke-ISCVID the clinical criteria was calculated to be 56% (95% CI: 52-60%), 61% (57-65%), and 71% (67-74%), respectively, while the specificity 67% (63-71%), 56% (51-61%), and 34% (29-38%), respectively.
Conclusions: The 2023 ISCVID Duke clinical criteria demonstrated the highest sensitivity for diagnosing IE compared to the 2015 and 2023 ESC Duke criteria in patients with intracardiac prosthetic material. However, this was at the expense of specificity.
期刊介绍：
Open Forum Infectious Diseases provides a global forum for the publication of clinical, translational, and basic research findings in a fully open access, online journal environment. The journal reflects the broad diversity of the field of infectious diseases, and focuses on the intersection of biomedical science and clinical practice, with a particular emphasis on knowledge that holds the potential to improve patient care in populations around the world. Fully peer-reviewed, OFID supports the international community of infectious diseases experts by providing a venue for articles that further the understanding of all aspects of infectious diseases.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
