EndocarditisIDENTICALNCT02759978
Individualized Diagnosis of Endocarditis and Its Therapy With a Focus on Infected Prosthetic materiAL
An observational study of Endocarditis and Prosthetic Material Related Infection, run by University Medical Center Groningen at 1 site in Netherlands.
Trial summary
Infective endocarditis (IE) is a frequent and serious complication of implanted intracardiac prosthetic material, with a high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, this study aims to improve outcome of IE, with a focus on patients with intracardiac prosthetic material. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Endocarditis, Prosthetic Material Related Infection
- What is being tested?
- diagnostic workup
- How many people
- 300 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNetherlands
- Study dates
- May 2016to May 2023
- How long will I take part?
- 1 Year
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients (≥18 years) in which infective endocarditis is suspected according to the BSAC-criteria 2012
Who may be able to join
- patients presenting to participating hospitals
- age ≥18 years
- BSAC-criteria 2012: suspicion of infective endocarditis, retained in the differential diagnosis after clinical reasoning, without alternative diagnosis
Who cannot join
- not fulfilling inclusion criteria
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Netherlands1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
University Medical Center Groningen
Groningen, 9713 GZ
Anna Gomes, MD, +31 50 3617533, a.gomes@umcg.nl
Bhanu Sinha, Prof. Dr. Dr., +31 50 3613692, b.sinha@umcg.nl
About this study
Infective endocarditis (IE) is a frequent and serious complication of implanted intracardiac prosthetic material, with a high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, this study aims to improve outcome of IE, with a focus on patients with intracardiac prosthetic material. In this study the investigators deal with research questions about both the diagnosis (microbiological, imaging, and expert opinion) and treatment of IE (with antimicrobial agents and surgical), in order to improve these clinical components and ultimately aim to improve outcome.
Read the detailed description
Rationale
Infective endocarditis (IE) is a frequent and serious complication of implanted intracardiac prosthetic material, with a high morbidity and mortality. The number of procedures where prosthetic material is implanted in the heart increases, as do the age and comorbidity of treated subjects. In current clinical practice diagnosis of infected intracardiac prosthetic material is often difficult because of the lack of sensitivity of the available diagnostic armamentarium for IE.
As a general rule, first line treatment of intracardiac prosthetic material related endocarditis consists of surgical prosthesis removal, combined with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. The exception encompasses uncomplicated prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). PVE actually has a fair chance of successful medical treatment alone (>50%), depending on the causative micro-organism. Although there is evidence and consensus with regard to the first line treatment, surgical removal is not always possible because of its associated high risk, technical limitations, or unwillingness of patients to undergo an invasive surgical procedure. Second and third line treatments do not include surgery, and consist of antimicrobial therapy with biofilm-penetrating agents during a predetermined timespan (second line) or as life-long suppressive antimicrobial therapy (third line). These treatments are the alternative in situations wherein first line treatment is not feasible or is unwanted. Although not extensively investigated, these treatments are considered suboptimal.
Therefore further research is necessary. More research is needed to diagnose IE more accurate and prompt, as current diagnostic criteria (the modified Duke criteria) for IE are insufficient and as it is unclear how to best allocate non-invasive imaging techniques, especially for intracardiac prosthetic material. More research is also needed to verify the indications for and optimize the use of second and third line treatments in patients with intracardiac prosthetic material.
Objectives
Primary
To define the diagnostic value of the combination of 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) and electrocardiogram-gated multidetector computed tomography angiography (ECG-gated MD-CTA) in patients suspected of IE, in particular those with intracardiac prosthetic material, when added to the standard diagnostic work-up for IE.
Secondary
- To define the predictive value of MD-CTA and 18F-FDG PET with regard to relapse rate and mortality of IE;
- To identify sources of false positive and false negative results in MD-CTA and 18F-FDG PET (e.g. the effect of the use of antimicrobial therapy on imaging findings);
- To identify the best MD-CTA and 18F-FDG PET scanning protocol;
- To define the role of 18F-FDG PET for finding other infectious lesions in the body;
- To assess and compare current clinical practices in patients with intracardiac prosthetic material related infection when the foreign material cannot be removed; to determine the outcomes of second and third line treatment as compared with first line treatment, and to determine predictors of outcome;
- To investigate the potential of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to improve the antimicrobial therapy in patients suspected of IE, in particular those with intracardiac prosthetic material:
- for which peak and through blood concentrations should be aimed at in IE for flucloxacillin, rifampicin, cefazolin, cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, amoxicillin, penicillin; fluconazole, flucytosine, amphotericin-B?
- for which peak blood concentrations should be aimed at for gentamicin in IE?
- for which peak and through blood concentrations should be aimed at for vancomycin in intracardiac prosthetic material related IE?
- for which through blood concentrations should be aimed at in IE for voriconazole?
- To investigate antimicrobial concentrations in resected cardiac tissue (e.g. heart valve or vegetation which has been removed based on medical indication) in patients with IE who have been treated medically with antimicrobials and who subsequently are operated upon.
Study design
Prospective multicentre observation study, with the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG) in Groningen as the leading centre.
Study population
Patients (≥18 years) in which IE is suspected according to the britisch society for antimicrobial chemotherapy (BSAC) criteria 2012.
Main study parameters/endpoints
Number of clinically identified (prosthetic material related) endocarditis episodes, according to (multiple) constellation(s) of diagnostic criteria versus number of "true" (prosthetic material related) endocarditis episodes, according to our gold standard "expert opinion after 12 months (+/- 2 weeks) follow-up" (based on clinical reasoning, the modified Duke criteria, and findings during surgery and from pathology).
- Being tested
- diagnostic workup
- Keywords
- Imaging, Computed Tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Positron Emission Tomography, Leukocyte Scintigraphy, Microbiological diagnostics, Sonication, Drug Monitoring, Cardiac Surgery
- Medical subject headings
- Endocarditis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
diagnostic workupOther
Our primary objective is to test whether the proportion of patients diagnosed correctly with the use of 18F-FDG-PET/CT, MD-CTA, and 18F-FDG-PET/MD-CTA added to the gold standard in current clinical practice, the modified Duke criteria by Li et al. 2000, is significantly higher as compared with the modified Duke criteria on itself. The gold standard is clinical judgement after clinical follow-up by a multidisciplinary team with medical specialists.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Suspicion NVE | Patients with suspicion of native valve endocarditis, infective endocarditis and no intracardiac prosthetic material in situ Receives: Other: diagnostic workup | |
| Suspicion (PVE) | Patients with a suspicion of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE), infective endocarditis and one or more prosthetic valves in situ Receives: Other: diagnostic workup | |
| Suspicion pacemaker/ICD related endocarditis | Patients with a suspicion of infective endocarditis and a pacemaker or implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in situ Receives: Other: diagnostic workup |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
IE clinical diagnosis
Number of clinically identified (prosthetic material related) endocarditis episodes, according to (multiple) constellation(s) of diagnostic criteria (the current gold standard of the modified Duke criteria, and newly set-up and to be investigated constellations of diagnostic elements)
Measured: 2 months
IE final diagnosis
Number of "true" prosthetic material related endocarditis episodes, according to expert opinion after follow-up (important components being findings during surgery and from pathology)
Measured: 1 year
Relapse/recurrence
Number of relapses / recurrences
Measured: 1 year
1 year mortality
Mortality after 1-year follow-up
Measured: 1 year
30 day mortality
Mortality after 30-days follow-up
Measured: 30 days
Duration of antimicrobial therapy
Duration of antimicrobial therapy (including appropriateness of drug, dosing and dosing regimen)
Measured: 30 days
Cardiac surgery
Cardiac surgery performed
Measured: 1 year
Complications
Number of complications: congestive heart failure (CHF) or other hemodynamic consequences, septic emboli, metastatic infection
Measured: 1 year
Secondary outcomes (1)
Adverse events
Number of adverse and serious adverse events
Measured: 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 May 2016 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2016
- Primary completionApr 2023 (estimated)
- Study completionMay 2023 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for EndocarditisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Medical Center GroningenThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (estimated)
- Target duration
- 1 Year
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Medical Center Groningen
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Bhanu Sinha, MD, PhD, University Medical Center Groningen
- Investigators
- Bhanu Sinha, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Groningen
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02759978
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- M16.189348
- Acronym
- IDENTICAL
- Status last verified
- Mar 2020
- First submitted
- 18 Apr 2016
- Last updated
- 25 Mar 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Currently single center study
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Mar 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Individualized Diagnosis of Endocarditis and Its Therapy With a Focus on Infected Prosthetic materiAL
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02759978
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IDENTICAL / M16.189348
- Keywords
- Imaging, Computed Tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Positron Emission Tomography, Leukocyte Scintigraphy, Microbiological diagnostics, Sonication, Drug Monitoring
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University Medical Center GroningenUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- May 2016
- Primary completion
- Apr 2023 (estimated)
- Study completion
- May 2023 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 May 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Infective endocarditis (IE) is a frequent and serious complication of implanted intracardiac prosthetic material, with a high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, this study aims to improve outcome of IE, with a focus on patients with intracardiac prosthetic material. In this study the investigators deal with research questions about both the diagnosis (microbiological, imaging, and expert opinion) and treatment of IE (with antimicrobial agents and surgical), in order to improve these clinical components and ultimately aim to improve outcome.
Detailed description
Rationale
Infective endocarditis (IE) is a frequent and serious complication of implanted intracardiac prosthetic material, with a high morbidity and mortality. The number of procedures where prosthetic material is implanted in the heart increases, as do the age and comorbidity of treated subjects. In current clinical practice diagnosis of infected intracardiac prosthetic material is often difficult because of the lack of sensitivity of the available diagnostic armamentarium for IE.
As a general rule, first line treatment of intracardiac prosthetic material related endocarditis consists of surgical prosthesis removal, combined with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. The exception encompasses uncomplicated prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). PVE actually has a fair chance of successful medical treatment alone (>50%), depending on the causative micro-organism. Although there is evidence and consensus with regard to the first line treatment, surgical removal is not always possible because of its associated high risk, technical limitations, or unwillingness of patients to undergo an invasive surgical procedure. Second and third line treatments do not include surgery, and consist of antimicrobial therapy with biofilm-penetrating agents during a predetermined timespan (second line) or as life-long suppressive antimicrobial therapy (third line). These treatments are the alternative in situations wherein first line treatment is not feasible or is unwanted. Although not extensively investigated, these treatments are considered suboptimal.
Therefore further research is necessary. More research is needed to diagnose IE more accurate and prompt, as current diagnostic criteria (the modified Duke criteria) for IE are insufficient and as it is unclear how to best allocate non-invasive imaging techniques, especially for intracardiac prosthetic material. More research is also needed to verify the indications for and optimize the use of second and third line treatments in patients with intracardiac prosthetic material.
Objectives
Primary
To define the diagnostic value of the combination of 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) and electrocardiogram-gated multidetector computed tomography angiography (ECG-gated MD-CTA) in patients suspected of IE, in particular those with intracardiac prosthetic material, when added to the standard diagnostic work-up for IE.
Secondary
- To define the predictive value of MD-CTA and 18F-FDG PET with regard to relapse rate and mortality of IE;
- To identify sources of false positive and false negative results in MD-CTA and 18F-FDG PET (e.g. the effect of the use of antimicrobial therapy on imaging findings);
- To identify the best MD-CTA and 18F-FDG PET scanning protocol;
- To define the role of 18F-FDG PET for finding other infectious lesions in the body;
- To assess and compare current clinical practices in patients with intracardiac prosthetic material related infection when the foreign material cannot be removed; to determine the outcomes of second and third line treatment as compared with first line treatment, and to determine predictors of outcome;
- To investigate the potential of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to improve the antimicrobial therapy in patients suspected of IE, in particular those with intracardiac prosthetic material:
- for which peak and through blood concentrations should be aimed at in IE for flucloxacillin, rifampicin, cefazolin, cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, amoxicillin, penicillin; fluconazole, flucytosine, amphotericin-B?
- for which peak blood concentrations should be aimed at for gentamicin in IE?
- for which peak and through blood concentrations should be aimed at for vancomycin in intracardiac prosthetic material related IE?
- for which through blood concentrations should be aimed at in IE for voriconazole?
- To investigate antimicrobial concentrations in resected cardiac tissue (e.g. heart valve or vegetation which has been removed based on medical indication) in patients with IE who have been treated medically with antimicrobials and who subsequently are operated upon.
Study design
Prospective multicentre observation study, with the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG) in Groningen as the leading centre.
Study population
Patients (≥18 years) in which IE is suspected according to the britisch society for antimicrobial chemotherapy (BSAC) criteria 2012.
Main study parameters/endpoints
Number of clinically identified (prosthetic material related) endocarditis episodes, according to (multiple) constellation(s) of diagnostic criteria versus number of "true" (prosthetic material related) endocarditis episodes, according to our gold standard "expert opinion after 12 months (+/- 2 weeks) follow-up" (based on clinical reasoning, the modified Duke criteria, and findings during surgery and from pathology).
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Target follow-up
- 1 Year
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Suspicion NVE | – | Other: diagnostic workupPatients with suspicion of native valve endocarditis, infective endocarditis and no intracardiac prosthetic material in situ |
| Suspicion (PVE) | – | Other: diagnostic workupPatients with a suspicion of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE), infective endocarditis and one or more prosthetic valves in situ |
| Suspicion pacemaker/ICD related endocarditis | – | Other: diagnostic workupPatients with a suspicion of infective endocarditis and a pacemaker or implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in situ |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients (≥18 years) in which infective endocarditis is suspected according to the BSAC-criteria 2012
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- patients presenting to participating hospitals
- age ≥18 years
- BSAC-criteria 2012: suspicion of infective endocarditis, retained in the differential diagnosis after clinical reasoning, without alternative diagnosis
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- not fulfilling inclusion criteria
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| diagnostic workupOur primary objective is to test whether the proportion of patients diagnosed correctly with the use of 18F-FDG-PET/CT, MD-CTA, and 18F-FDG-PET/MD-CTA added to the gold standard in current clinical practice, the modified Duke criteria by Li et al. 2000, is significantly higher as compared with the modified Duke criteria on itself. The gold standard is clinical judgement after clinical follow-up by a multidisciplinary team with medical specialists. | Other | Suspicion (PVE), Suspicion NVE, Suspicion pacemaker/ICD related endocarditis |
Primary outcome
IE clinical diagnosis
Time frame: 2 months
Number of clinically identified (prosthetic material related) endocarditis episodes, according to (multiple) constellation(s) of diagnostic criteria (the current gold standard of the modified Duke criteria, and newly set-up and to be investigated constellations of diagnostic elements)
IE final diagnosis
Time frame: 1 year
Number of "true" prosthetic material related endocarditis episodes, according to expert opinion after follow-up (important components being findings during surgery and from pathology)
Relapse/recurrence
Time frame: 1 year
Number of relapses / recurrences
1 year mortality
Time frame: 1 year
Mortality after 1-year follow-up
30 day mortality
Time frame: 30 days
Mortality after 30-days follow-up
Duration of antimicrobial therapy
Time frame: 30 days
Duration of antimicrobial therapy (including appropriateness of drug, dosing and dosing regimen)
Cardiac surgery
Time frame: 1 year
Cardiac surgery performed
Complications
Time frame: 1 year
Number of complications: congestive heart failure (CHF) or other hemodynamic consequences, septic emboli, metastatic infection
1 secondary outcome
Adverse events
Time frame: 1 year
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Mar 2020.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Currently single center study
Related trials for Endocarditis
Not yet recruiting
Metabolic Profiling Among Patients Suspected of Infective Endocarditis - PPSIE Comparing Metabolomes of Bloodstream Infections Versus Infective Endocarditis
Infective Endocarditis (IE)
Recruiting
CBCT vs OPT on the Oral Health Status at 12 Months of Patients Hospitalized for Infective Endocarditis.
Infective Endocarditis
RecruitingPhase 2
Combination Cefazolin With Ertapenem for Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteremia
Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteremia, Staphylococcus Aureus Septicemia
Not yet recruitingObservational study
REVIVE-FR Registry
Bioprosthetic Valve Failure, Prosthetic Heart Valve Dysfunction
RecruitingObservational study
Impact of Preoperative Dental Screening in Reducing Infective Endocarditis Risk in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Patients
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation, Dental
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Bhanu Sinha, MD, PhD principal investigator
Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Groningen
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Endocarditis and Prosthetic Material Related Infection, run by University Medical Center Groningen at 1 site in Netherlands.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Mar 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Anna Gomes, MD (+31503617533, a.gomes@umcg.nl), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
IE clinical diagnosis (time frame: 2 months). The study lists 8 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Mar 2020.