Surgical treatment of infective endocarditis at comprehensive versus primary valve centers

Abstract

BackgroundA recent expert consensus statement proposed designation of comprehensive and primary valve centers, with a recommendation that comprehensive centers house surgical skill and resources to treat patients with infective endocarditis (IE). We sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent valve surgery for IE at comprehensive versus primary valve centers within a large health care system. MethodsWe reviewed 513 consecutive patients who underwent IE surgery at 8 hospitals (2 comprehensive and 6 primary valve centers) from 2014 to 2020. Outcomes from comprehensive and primary valve centers were compared after propensity score matching on the basis of patient characteristics, valve involvement, valve type, and IE treatment status. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for operative mortality. ResultsPropensity score matching generated comparable groups with similar mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Gaca IE risk scores among comprehensive and primary valve center cohorts. Comprehensive valve centers were more likely to perform the Bentall procedure (60.4% vs 21.7%; P < .01) when aortic root abscess was present and mitral valve repair (50.4% vs 26.3%; P < .01) in cases of mitral valve involvement. Operative mortality was significantly lower at comprehensive valve centers (6.2% vs 13.0%; P = .04), and multivariate logistic regression suggested that surgery at comprehensive valve centers was protective against operative mortality (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.88; P = .02). Similar findings were present in a sensitivity analysis limited to patients with active IE only. ConclusionsAn increased risk for operative mortality was associated with surgery performed at primary valve centers compared with comprehensive valve centers. Referral or transfer of patients with IE and surgical indications to comprehensive valve centers should be considered.