Studies investigating cardiac implantable electronic device infective endocarditis (CIED-IE) epidemiological changes and prognosis over long periods of time are lacking. Retrospective single cardiovascular surgery center cohort study of definite CIED-IE episodes between 1981–2020. A comparative analysis of two periods (1981–2000 vs 2001–2020) was conducted to analyze changes in epidemiology and outcome over time. One-hundred and thirty-eight CIED-IE episodes were diagnosed: 25 (18%) first period and 113 (82%) second. CIED-IE was 4.5 times more frequent in the second period, especially in implantable cardiac defibrillators. Age (63 [53-70] vs 71 [63–76] years, P < .01), comorbidities (CCI 3.0 [2–4] vs 4.5 [3–6], P > .01), nosocomial infections (4% vs 15.9%, P = .02) and transfers from other centers (8% vs 41.6%, P < .01) were significantly more frequent in the second period, as were methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococcal (MR-CoNS) (0% vs 13.3%, P < .01) and Enterococcus spp. (0% vs 5.3%, P = .01) infections, pulmonary embolism (0% vs 10.6%, P < .01) and heart failure (12% vs 28.3%, p < .01). Second period surgery rates were lower (96% vs 87.6%, P = .09), and there were no differences in in-hospital (20% vs 11.5%, P = .11) and one-year mortalities (24% vs 15%, P = .33), or relapses (8% vs 5.3%, P = 0.65). Multivariate analysis showed Charlson index (hazard ratios [95% confidence intervals]; 1.5 [1.16–1.94]) and septic shock (23.09 [4.57–116.67]) were associated with a worse prognosis, whereas device removal (0.11 [.02–.57]), transfers (0.13 [.02–0.95]), and second-period diagnosis (0.13 [.02–.71]) were associated with better one-year outcomes. CIED-IE episodes increased more than four-fold during last 40 years. Despite CIED-IE involved an older population with more comorbidities, antibiotic-resistant MR-CoNS, and complex devices, one-year survival improved.

OBJECTIVES: Several risk prediction models have been developed to estimate the risk of mortality after valve surgery for active infective endocarditis (IE), but few external validations have been conducted to assess their accuracy. We previously developed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of IE-specific factors for the in-hospital mortality rate after IE valve surgery, whose obtained pooled estimations were the basis for the development of a new score (APORTEI). The aim of the present study was to assess its prognostic accuracy in a nationwide cohort. METHODS: We analysed the prognostic utility of the APORTEI score using patient-level data from a multicentric national cohort. Patients who underwent surgery for active IE between 2008 and 2018 were included. Discrimination was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and the calibration was assessed using the calibration slope and the Hosmer–Lemeshow test. Agreement between the APORTEI and the EuroSCORE I was also analysed by Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), the Bland–Altman agreement analysis and a scatterplot graph. RESULTS: The 11 variables that comprised the APORTEI score were analysed in the sample. The APORTEI score was calculated in 1338 patients. The overall observed surgical mortality rate was 25.56%. The score demonstrated adequate discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.75; 95% confidence interval 0.72–0.77) and calibration (calibration slope = 1.03; Hosmer–Lemeshow test P = 0.389). We found a lack of agreement between the APORTEI and EuroSCORE I (concordance correlation coefficient = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: The APORTEI score, developed from a systematic review and meta-analysis, showed an adequate estimation of the risk of mortality after IE valve surgery in a nationwide cohort.