Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T06:51:03.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prophylactic antibiotics in interventional paediatric cardiac catheterisation: old habits die hard?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2014

Christopher D. Gillett  and
Gareth J. Morgan
Christopher D. Gillett
Affiliation:
Bristol Congenital Heart Centre, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children, Bristol, United Kingdom
Gareth J. Morgan*
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatric Cardiology, Evelina London Children’s Hospital, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, United Kingdom
*
Correspondence: Dr G. J. Morgan, MB, BaO, BCh, MPhil, MRCPCH, Department of Paediatric Cardiology, Evelina London Children’s Hospital, Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Trust, Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7RT, United Kingdom. Tel: +0 207 188 7188; Fax: +0 207 188 4566; E-mail: drgarethjmorgan@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Antibiotic prophylaxis in congenital cardiac disease has long been a topic of debate. Although there is little dispute around antibiotic cover for surgical procedures and catheter interventions where foreign material is being inserted, there are little data specific to non-device-placement procedures such as atrial septostomy or balloon valvotomy. We sought to assess the effect of routine prophylaxis on post-interventional infections via a retrospective pseudo-randomised analysis, and an online survey on paediatric interventional cardiologists in the United Kingdom and United States.

Keywords

Bacterial endocarditisprophylactic antibioticsinterventional cardiologycatheterisation
Type
Original Articles
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , April 2015 , pp. 693 - 697
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Committee on Prevention of Rheumatic Fever and Bacterial Endocarditis. Prevention of rheumatic fever and bacterial endocarditis through control of streptococcal infections. Circulation 1955; 11: 317–320.Google Scholar
2. Wilson, W, Taubert, KA, Gewitz, M, et al. Prevention of infective endocarditis: guidelines from the American Heart Association: a guideline from the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee; American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young; American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology; American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia; Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group. Circulation 2007; 116: 1736–1754.Google Scholar
3. Richey, R, Wray, D, Stokes, T. Prophylaxis against infective endocarditis: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ 2008; 336: 770–771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Oliver, R, Roberts, GJ, Hooper, L, Worthington, HV. Antibiotics for the prophylaxis of bacterial endocarditis in dentistry (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 10: CD00381.Google Scholar
5. Mori, Y, Nakazawa, M, Yagihara, T. Complications of pediatric cardiac catheterization and system of catheterization laboratories minimizing complications-Japanese multicenter survey. J Cardiol 2010; 56: 183–188.Google Scholar
6. Cassidy, SC, Schmidt, KG, Van Hare, GF, Stanger, P, Teitel, DF. Complications of pediatric cardiac catheterization: a 3-year study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 1285–1293.Google Scholar
7. Mehta, R, Lee, KJ, Chaturvedi, R, Benson, L. Complications of pediatric cardiac catheterisation: a review in the current era. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2008; 72: 278–285.Google Scholar
8. Vitiello, R, McCrindle, BW, Nykanen, D, Freedom, RM, Benson, LN. Complications associated with pediatric cardiac catheterisation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 32: 1433–1440.Google Scholar
9. Baddour, LM, Bettmann, MA, Bolger, AF, et al. Nonvalvular cardiovascular device-related infections. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38: 1128–1130.Google Scholar
10. Weber, R, Berger, C, Balmer, C, et al. Interventions using foreign material to treat congenital heart disease in children increase the risk for infective endocarditis. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008; 27: 544–550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Bratzler, DW, Dellinger, EP, Olsen, KM, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2013; 70: 195–283.Google Scholar
12. Nishimura, RA, Carabello, BA, Faxon, DP, et al. ACC/AHA 2008 guideline update on valvular heart disease: focused update on infective endocarditis: a report on the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 2008; 118: 887–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Rosenthal, LB, Feja, KN, Levasseur, SM, Alba, LR, Gersony, W, Saiman, L. The changing epidemiology of pediatric endocarditis at the children’s hospital over seven decades. Pediatr Cadiol 2010; 31: 813–820.Google Scholar
14. Day, MD, Gauvreau, K, Shulman, S, Newburger, JW. Characteristics of children hospitalized with infective endocarditis. Circulation 2009; 119: 865–870.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Knirsch, W, Nadal, D. Infective endocarditis in congenital heart disease. Eur J Pediatr 2011; 170: 1111–1127.Google Scholar
16. Task Force on the Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Infective Endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infective endocarditis (new version 2009). Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 2369–2413.Google Scholar
17. Kerr, JR. Penicillin allergy: a study of incidence as reported by patients. Br J Clin Pract 1994; 48: 5–7.Google Scholar
18. Sogn, DD, Evans, R 3rd, Shepherd, GM, et al. Results of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases collaborative clinical trial to test the predictive value of skin testing with major and minor penicillin derivatives in hospitalized adults. Arch Internal Med 1992; 152: 1025–1032.Google Scholar
19. Park, M, Li, JTC. Diagnosis and management of penicillin allergy. Mayo Clin Proc 2005; 80: 405–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Karabus, S, Motala, C. Penicillin allergy in children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009; 2: 64–66.Google Scholar
21. Bor, DH, Himmelstein, DU. Endocarditis prophylaxis for patients with mitral valve prolapse. A quantitative analysis. Am J Med 1984; 76: 711–717.Google Scholar
22. Rao, SC, Ahmed, M, Hagan, R. One dose per day compared to multiple doses per day of gentamicin for treatment of suspected or proven sepsis in neonates (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 56: 183–188.Google Scholar
23. Ghaleb, MA, Barber, N, Franklin, BD, Wong, ICK. The incidence and nature of prescribing and medication administration errors in paediatric inpatients. Arch Dis Child 2010; 95: 113–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Liker, JK. The Toyota Way. McGraw Hill Books, Toronto, ON, 2004.Google Scholar
25. Culig, MH, Kunkle, RF, Frndak, DC, Grunden, N, Meher, TD Jr, Magovern, GJ Jr. Improving patient care in cardiac surgery using Toyota production system based methodology. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 91: 394–399.Google Scholar
26. Johnson, JA, Boyce, TG, Cetta, F, Steckelberg, JM, Johnson, JN. Infective endocarditis in the pediatric patient: a 60-year single-institution review. Mayo Clin Proc 2012; 87: 629–635.Google Scholar