Thomas J. Pallasch

Diagnosis, Treatment, and Long-Term Management of Kawasaki Disease A Statement for Health Professionals From the Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis and Kawasaki Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, American Heart Association

Background—Kawasaki disease is an acute self-limited vasculitis of childhood that is characterized by fever, bilateral nonexudative conjunctivitis, erythema of the lips and oral mucosa, changes in the extremities, rash, and cervical lymphadenopathy. Coronary artery aneurysms or ectasia develop in ≈15% to 25% of untreated children and may lead to ischemic heart disease or sudden death. Methods and Results—A multidisciplinary committee of experts was convened to revise the American Heart Association recommendations for diagnosis, treatment, and long-term management of Kawasaki disease. The writing group proposes a new algorithm to aid clinicians in deciding which children with fever for ≥5 days and ≤4 classic criteria should undergo echocardiography, receive intravenous gamma globulin (IVIG) treatment, or both for Kawasaki disease. The writing group reviews the available data regarding the initial treatment for children with acute Kawasaki disease, as well for those who have persistent or recrudescent fever despite initial therapy with IVIG, including IVIG retreatment and treatment with corticosteroids, tumor necrosis factor-&agr; antagonists, and abciximab. Long-term management of patients with Kawasaki disease is tailored to the degree of coronary involvement; recommendations regarding antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy, physical activity, follow-up assessment, and the appropriate diagnostic procedures to evaluate cardiac disease are classified according to risk strata. Conclusions—Recommendations for the initial evaluation, treatment in the acute phase, and long-term management of patients with Kawasaki disease are intended to assist physicians in understanding the range of acceptable approaches for caring for patients with Kawasaki disease. The ultimate decisions for case management must be made by physicians in light of the particular conditions presented by individual patients.

Diagnosis, Treatment, and Long-Term Management of Kawasaki Disease: A Statement for Health Professionals From the Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, American Heart Association

Background. Kawasaki disease is an acute self-limited vasculitis of childhood that is characterized by fever, bilateral nonexudative conjunctivitis, erythema of the lips and oral mucosa, changes in the extremities, rash, and cervical lymphadenopathy. Coronary artery aneurysms or ectasia develop in ∼15% to 25% of untreated children and may lead to ischemic heart disease or sudden death. Methods and Results. A multidisciplinary committee of experts was convened to revise the American Heart Association recommendations for diagnosis, treatment, and long-term management of Kawasaki disease. The writing group proposes a new algorithm to aid clinicians in deciding which children with fever for ≥5 days and ≤4 classic criteria should undergo electrocardiography, receive intravenous gamma globulin (IVIG) treatment, or both for Kawasaki disease. The writing group reviews the available data regarding the initial treatment for children with acute Kawasaki disease, as well for those who have persistent or recrudescent fever despite initial therapy with IVIG, including IVIG retreatment and treatment with corticosteroids, tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists, and abciximab. Long-term management of patients with Kawasaki disease is tailored to the degree of coronary involvement; recommendations regarding antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy, physical activity, follow-up assessment, and the appropriate diagnostic procedures to evaluate cardiac disease are classified according to risk strata. Conclusions. Recommendations for the initial evaluation, treatment in the acute phase, and long-term management of patients with Kawasaki disease are intended to assist physicians in understanding the range of acceptable approaches for caring for patients with Kawasaki disease. The ultimate decisions for case management must be made by physicians in light of the particular conditions presented by individual patients.

Diagnosis and Management of Infective Endocarditis and Its Complications

Infective endocarditis (IE) carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Rapid diagnosis, effective treatment, and prompt recognition of complications are essential to good patient outcome. Therapy of IE caused by the more commonly encountered organisms, including streptococci, enterococci, staphylococci, and the HACEK organisms ( Hemophilus parainfluenzae, Hemophilus aphrophilus, Actinobacillus [Hemophilus] actinomycetemcomitans, Cardiobacterium hominis, Eikenella species , and Kingella species), has been addressed previously by this committee.1 Likewise, the antimicrobial prevention of endocarditis has also been previously addressed.2 In this article, we review and update the current literature with respect to diagnostic challenges and strategies, difficult therapeutic situations, and management choices in patients with IE. This article focuses predominantly on adults with IE. A separate article, currently in preparation, will address the issues of IE in childhood. ### Clinical Criteria The diagnosis of IE is straightforward in those patients with classic oslerian manifestations: bacteremia or fungemia, evidence of active valvulitis, peripheral emboli, and immunologic vascular phenomena. In other patients, however, the classic peripheral stigmata may be few or absent.3 This may occur during acute courses of IE, particularly among intravenous drug abuse (IVDA) patients in whom IE is often due to Staphylococcus aureus infection of right-sided heart valves, or in patients with IE caused by microorganisms such as HACEK. Acute IE evolves too quickly for the development of immunologic vascular phenomena, which are more characteristic of subacute IE. In addition, acute right-sided IE valve lesions do not create the peripheral emboli and immunologic vascular phenomena that can result from left-sided valvular involvement.3 The variability in the clinical presentation of IE requires a diagnostic strategy that will be both sensitive for disease detection and specific for its exclusion across all the forms of the disease. In 1981, von Reyn et al4 proposed a scheme for strict case definitions of IE …

Nonvalvular Cardiovascular Device–Related Infections

More than a century ago, Osler took numerous syndrome descriptions of cardiac valvular infection that were incomplete and confusing and categorized them into the cardiovascular infections known as infective endocarditis. Because he was both a clinician and a pathologist, he was able to provide a meaningful outline of this complex disease. Technical advances have allowed us to better subcategorize infective endocarditis on the basis of microbiological etiology. More recently, the syndromes of infective endocarditis and endarteritis have been expanded to include infections involving a variety of cardiovascular prostheses and devices that are used to replace or assist damaged or dysfunctional tissues (Table 1). Taken together, infections of these novel intracardiac, arterial, and venous devices are frequently seen in medical centers throughout the developed world. In response, the American Heart Association’s Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease wrote this review to assist and educate clinicians who care for an increasing number of patients with nonvalvular cardiovascular device–related infections. Because timely guidelines1,2 exist that address the prevention and management of intravascular catheter–related infections, these device-related infections are not discussed in the present Statement. View this table: TABLE 1. Nonvalvular Cardiovascular Device–Related Infections This review is divided into two broad sections. The first section examines general principles for the evaluation and management of infection that apply to all nonvalvular cardiovascular devices. Despite the marked variability in composition, structure, function, and frequency of infection among the various types of nonvalvular cardiovascular devices reviewed in this article, there are several areas of commonality for infection of these devices. These include clinical manifestations, microbiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. The second section addresses each device and describes unique clinical features of infection. Each device is placed into one of 3 categories—intracardiac, arterial, or venous—for discussion. ### Clinical Manifestations The specific signs and symptoms associated with an infection of a …

Prevention of bacterial endocarditis. Recommendations by the American Heart Association.

Objective To update recommendations issued by the American Heart Association last published in 1990 for the prevention of bacterial endocarditis in individuals at risk for this disease. Participants An ad hoc writing group appointed by the American Heart Association for their expertise in endocarditis and treatment with liaison members representing the American Dental Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Evidence The recommendations in this article reflect analyses of relevant literature regarding procedure-related endocarditis, in vitro susceptibility data of pathogens causing endocarditis, results of prophylactic studies in animal models of endocarditis, and retrospective analyses of human endocarditis cases in terms of antibiotic prophylaxis usage patterns and apparent prophylaxis failures. MEDLINE database searches from 1936 through 1996 were done using the root words endocarditis, bacteremia, and antibiotic prophylaxis. Recommendations in this document fall into evidence level III of the US Preventive Services Task Force categories of evidence. Consensus Process The recommendations were formulated by the writing group after specific therapeutic regimens were discussed. The consensus statement was subsequently reviewed by outside experts not affiliated with the writing group and by the Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee of the American Heart Association. These guidelines are meant to aid practitioners but are not intended as the standard of care or as a substitute for clinical judgment. Conclusions Major changes in the updated recommendations include the following: (1) emphasis that most cases of endocarditis are not attributable to an invasive procedure; (2) cardiac conditions are stratified into high-, moderate-, and negligible-risk categories based on potential outcome if endocarditis develops; (3) procedures that may cause bacteremia and for which prophylaxis is recommended are more clearly specified; (4) an algorithm was developed to more clearly define when prophylaxis is recommended for patients with mitral valve prolapse; (5) for oral or dental procedures the initial amoxicillin dose is reduced to 2 g, a follow-up antibiotic dose is no longer recommended, erythromycin is no longer recommended for penicillin-allergic individuals, but clindamycin and other alternatives are offered; and (6) for gastrointestinal or genitourinary procedures, the prophylactic regimens have been simplified. These changes were instituted to more clearly define when prophylaxis is or is not recommended, improve practitioner and patient compliance, reduce cost and potential gastrointestinal adverse effects, and approach more uniform worldwide recommendations.

Prevention of infective endocarditis: Guidelines from the American Heart Association: A guideline from the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis and Kawasaki Disease Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, and the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group

BACKGROUND The purpose of this statement is to update the recommendations by the American Heart Association (AHA) for the prevention of infective endocarditis, which were last published in 1997. METHODS AND RESULTS A writing group appointed by the AHA for their expertise in prevention and treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) with liaison members representing the American Dental Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Academy of Pediatrics. The writing group reviewed input from national and international experts on IE. The recommendations in this document reflect analyses of relevant literature regarding procedure-related bacteremia and IE; in vitro susceptibility data of the most common microorganisms, which cause IE; results of prophylactic studies in animal models of experimental endocarditis; and retrospective and prospective studies of prevention of IE. MEDLINE database searches from 1950 through 2006 were done for English language articles using the following search terms: endocarditis, infective endocarditis, prophylaxis, prevention, antibiotic, antimicrobial, pathogens, organisms, dental, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, streptococcus, enterococcus, staphylococcus, respiratory, dental surgery, pathogenesis, vaccine, immunization and bacteremia. The reference lists of the identified articles were also searched. The writing group also searched the AHA online library. The American College of Cardiology/AHA classification of recommendations and levels of evidence for practice guidelines were used. The article subsequently was reviewed by outside experts not affiliated with the writing group and by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. CONCLUSIONS The major changes in the updated recommendations include the following. (1) The committee concluded that only an extremely small number of cases of IE might be prevented by antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures even if such prophylactic therapy were 100 percent effective. (2) IE prophylaxis for dental procedures should be recommended only for patients with underlying cardiac conditions associated with the highest risk of adverse outcome from IE. (3) For patients with these underlying cardiac conditions, prophylaxis is recommended for all dental procedures that involve manipulation of gingival tissue or the periapical region of teeth or perforation of the oral mucosa. (4) Prophylaxis is not recommended based solely on an increased lifetime risk of acquisition of IE. (5) Administration of antibiotics solely to prevent endocarditis is not recommended for patients who undergo a genitourinary or gastrointestinal tract procedure. These changes are intended to define more clearly when IE prophylaxis is or is not recommended and to provide more uniform and consistent global recommendations.

Prevention of Bacterial Endocarditis: Recommendations by the American Heart Association

OBJECTIVE To update recommendations issued by the American Heart Association last published in 1990 for the prevention of bacterial endocarditis in individuals at risk for this disease. PARTICIPANTS An ad hoc writing group appointed by the American Heart Association for their expertise in endocarditis and treatment with liaison members representing the American Dental Association, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. EVIDENCE The recommendations in this article reflect analyses of relevant literature regarding procedure-related endocarditis, in vitro susceptibility data of pathogens causing endocarditis, results of prophylactic studies in animal models of endocarditis, and retrospective analyses of human endocarditis cases in terms of antibiotic prophylaxis usage patterns and apparent prophylaxis failures. MEDLINE database searches from 1936 through 1996 were done using the root words endocarditis, bacteremia, and antibiotic prophylaxis. Recommendations in this document fall into evidence level III of the US Preventive Services Task Force categories of evidence. CONSENSUS PROCESS The recommendations were formulated by the writing group after specific therapeutic regimens were discussed. The consensus statement was subsequently reviewed by outside experts not affiliated with the writing group and by the Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee of the American Heart Association. These guidelines are meant to aid practitioners but are not intended as the standard of care or as a substitute for clinical judgment. CONCLUSIONS Major changes in the updated recommendations include the following: (1) emphasis that most cases of endocarditis are not attributable to an invasive procedure; (2) cardiac conditions are stratified into high-, moderate-, and negligible-risk categories based on potential outcome if endocarditis develops; (3) procedures that may cause bacteremia and for which prophylaxis is recommended are more clearly specified; (4) an algorithm was developed to more clearly define when prophylaxis is recommended for patients with mitral valve prolapse; (5) for oral or dental procedures the initial amoxicillin dose is reduced to 2 g, a follow-up antibiotic dose is no longer recommended, erythromycin is no longer recommended for penicillin-allergic individuals, but clindamycin and other alternatives are offered; and (6) for gastrointestinal or genitourinary procedures, the prophylactic regimens have been simplified. These changes were instituted to more clearly define when prophylaxis is or is not recommended, improve practitioner and patient compliance, reduce cost and potential gastrointestinal adverse effects, and approach more uniform worldwide recommendations.

Antibiotic prophylaxis: problems in paradise

The age of antibiotic prophylaxis may be receding into its twilight years because the assumption upon which it was based has not proved generally true. Although antibiotics treat infections, limited benefit has been demonstrated in preventing infections. These are two entirely different biologic entities, a distinction which appears to have gone unappreciated by many for more than 50 years. If the principles of antibiotic prophylaxis established more than 40 years ago had been assiduously followed, many of its abuses could have been avoided. This may not have stopped our legal colleagues, but it would have been worth an effort on behalf of our patients. It is likely that the massive overuse of antibiotics as litigation prevention has contributed to the global epidemic of antibiotic-resistant micro-organisms and an unknown number of serious adverse effects to the antibiotics themselves. Even with this abuse, much money has still flowed from defendant to plaintiff. Substantial data exist that antibiotics do not prevent bacteremias. The absolute risk rate for bacterial endocarditis after dental treatment even in at-risk patients is very low. Antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical infections requires specific dosing schedules (perioperative surgical prophylaxis) to be successful. Hopefully the difficulties presented herein regarding antibiotic prophylaxis will lead to their more enlightened use in the future.

Prevention of Bacterial Endocarditis

Surgical and dental procedures and instrumentations involving mucosal surfaces or contaminated tissue commonly cause transient bacteremia that rarely persists for more than 15 minutes. Blood-borne bacteria may lodge on damaged or abnormal heart valves or on the endocardium or the endothelium near congenital anatomic defects, resulting in bacterial endocarditis or endarteritis. Although bacteremia is common following many invasive procedures, only a limited number of bacterial species commonly cause endocarditis. It is impossible to predict which patient will develop this infection or which particular procedure will be responsible. Certain cardiac conditions are more often associated with endocarditis than others (Table 1). Furthermore, certain dental and surgical procedures are much more likely to initiate the bacteremia that results in endocarditis than are other procedures (Table 2). Prophylactic antibiotics are recommended for patients at risk for developing endocarditis who are undergoing those procedures most likely to produce bacteremia with organisms that commonly cause endocarditis. Prophylaxis is most effective when given perioperatively in doses that are sufficient to assure adequate antibiotic concentrations in the serum during and after the procedure. To reduce the likelihood of microbial resistance, it is important that prophylactic

Naloxone-associated morbidity and mortality

Naloxone (Narcan) is generally considered to be a narcotic antagonist devoid of pharmacologic activity except for its reversal of opioid (narcotic) effects. Case reports indicate that naloxone in its role of narcotic antagonist may induce hypertension, pulmonary edema, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, or cardiac arrest in certain patients, particularly those with pre-existing cardiac abnormalities. These adverse effects of naloxone may be due to extreme sympathetic nervous system activity resulting from the reversal of narcotic analgesia, an effect of the drug on peripheral or central opioid receptors or a drug interaction with other anesthetic agents. Any patient given naloxone, particularly in the presence of surgical pain, should be closely monitored for adverse cardiovascular effects.