Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
MAJOR ARTICLE Comprehensive Diagnostic Strategy for Blood Culture–Negative Endocarditis: A Prospective Study of 819 New Cases Pierre-Edouard Fournier,1,2 Franck Thuny,3 Hervé Richet,1 Hubert Lepidi,1 Jean-Paul Casalta,2 Jean-Pierre Arzouni,2 Max Maurin,5 Marie Célard,6 Jean-Luc Mainardi,7 Thierry Caus,8 Frédéric Collart,3 Gilbert Habib,4 and Didier Raoult1,2 1 Unité de Recherche sur les Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales Emergentes, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique–Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Unité Mixte de Recherche 6236, Faculté de Médecine, Université de la Méditerranée, and 2Pôle de Maladies Infectieuses, 7Service de Chirurgie Cardiaque, and 8Service de Cardiologie, Hôpital de la Timone, Marseille, 3Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Grenoble, Grenoble, 4Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Centre de Biologie Est, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, 5Service de Microbiologie, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, and 6Service de Chirurgie Cardiaque, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Amiens, France (See the editorial commentary by Lamas, on pages 141–142.) Background. Blood culture–negative endocarditis (BCNE) may account for up to 31% of all cases of endocarditis. Methods. We used a prospective, multimodal strategy incorporating serological, molecular, and histopathological assays to investigate specimens from 819 patients suspected of having BCNE. Results. Diagnosis of endocarditis was first ruled out for 60 patients. Among 759 patients with BCNE, a causative microorganism was identified in 62.7%, and a noninfective etiology in 2.5%. Blood was the most useful specimen, providing a diagnosis for 47.7% of patients by serological analysis (mainly Q fever and Bartonella infections). Broad-range polymerase chain reaction (PCR) of blood and Bartonella–specific Western blot methods diagnosed 7 additional cases. PCR of valvular biopsies identified 109 more etiologies, mostly streptococci, Tropheryma whipplei, Bartonella species, and fungi. Primer extension enrichment reaction and autoimmunohistochemistry identified a microorganism in 5 additional patients. No virus or Chlamydia species were detected. A noninfective cause of endocarditis, particularly neoplasic or autoimmune disease, was determined by histological analysis or by searching for antinuclear antibodies in 19 (2.5%) of the patients. Our diagnostic strategy proved useful and sensitive for BCNE workup. Conclusions. We highlight the major role of zoonotic agents and the underestimated role of noninfective diseases in BCNE. We propose serological analysis for Coxiella burnetii and Bartonella species, detection of antinuclear antibodies and rheumatoid factor as first-line tests, followed by specific PCR assays for T. whipplei, Bartonella species, and fungi in blood. Broad-spectrum 16S and 18S ribosomal RNA PCR may be performed on valvular biopsies, when available. Blood culture-negative endocarditis (BCNE)—that is, endocarditis in which no causative microorganism can be grown in a culture taken from a blood sample by using the usual laboratory methods—accounts for Received 18 December 2009; accepted 20 March 2010; electronically published 11 June 2010. Reprints or correspondence: Dr. Didier Raoult, Unité de Recherche sur les Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales Emergentes, CNRS-IRD UMR 6236, Faculté de médecine, Université de la Méditerranée, 27 Blvd. Jean Moulin, 13385 Marseille cedex 05, France ([email protected]). Clinical Infectious Diseases 2010; 51(2):131–140 2010 by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. 1058-4838/2010/5102-0002$15.00 DOI: 10.1086/653675 2.5%–31% of all cases of endocarditis [1]. This variation in incidence may be explained by several factors, including (i) differences in the diagnostic criteria used; (ii) specific epidemiological factors, as for fastidious zoonotic agents; (iii) variations in the early use of antibiotics prior to blood sampling; (iv) differences in sampling strategies [2]; or (v) involvement of unknown pathogens. In our laboratory, we have diversified the diagnostic tests used over the past few years for the diagnosis of BCNE. In particular, we have demonstrated the usefulness of systematic serological testing for the detection of fastidious agents, especially Coxiella burnetii and Bartonella species, but also Brucella species, Legionella Blood Culture–Negative Endocarditis • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • 131 Figure 1. Distribution of the 819 patients with suspected blood culture–negative endocarditis (BCNE) studied from 1 June 2001 to 1 September 2009, according to the etiological diagnosis (a) and the year (b). Black columns, Number of patients per year for whom we obtained an etiological diagnosis (infectious or not). Gray columns, Number of patients without any etiological diagnosis. Values above each column represent percentages of etiological diagnoses obtained each year. Agents include Tropheryma whipplei. pneumophila, and Mycoplasma species [2, 3]. Two other methods that exhibited great potential for the diagnosis of BCNE were histological examination [4] and broad-range polymerase chain reaction (PCR), particularly when applied to valvular biopsies [5]. The few studies using PCR for the diagnosis of BCNE published to date have highlighted the importance of streptococci and fastidious bacteria, although their respective prevalence has not been estimated [3, 5–12]. In addition, 132 • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • Fournier et al among fastidious bacteria, the role of Chlamydia pneumoniae in BCNE remains uncertain, as is the case for viruses [13]. Consequently, diagnosis of BCNE remains a challenge, as highlighted by the 21% rate of cases without any identified causative agent in the largest series of BCNE cases reported to date [3]. Since our previous publication of a large series of BCNE cases [3], our laboratory received an increasing number of specimens from patients with BCNE. Here, we prospectively used Table 1. Epidemiological Variables among the 740 Studied Patients Classified as Definite or Possible According to the Duke Criteria [15] Variable No. of patients Male-to-female ratio Age, mean years SD Age range, years Geographic origin a France (Marseille) Definite patients Possible patients 549 2.7 58.3 15.7 12–92 191 1.9 58.2 17.1 3–92 477 (156) 172 (60) Europe North America 32 20 12 4 Middle East Otherb 16 1 4 2 Echocardiographic signs of endocarditis, % Left-sided endocarditis, % 84.9 91.6 73.8 83.8 Right-sided endocarditis,c % Pacemaker, % Antibiotics prior to blood cultures, % 2.9 5.5 44.3 1.6 14.6 60.2 a b c The main contributing cities were Amiens, Grenoble, Lyon, and Paris. Includes patients from South America, North Africa, Asia, and Australia. Not including pacemakers. a comprehensive strategy incorporating a battery of laboratory techniques [3, 5, 14], including several new ones, to increase the rate of diagnoses in patients with BCNE and to evaluate the prevalence of various agents missed by standard blood cultures, including fastidious bacteria and viruses. We also estimated the incidence of noninfective causes of endocarditis. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients From 1 June 2001 to 1 September 2009, we prospectively included all patients with suspected BCNE for whom specimens were referred to our laboratory (Figure 1 and Table 1). For each studied patient, a questionnaire was completed by the physician in charge. The questions asked are detailed in Tables 2 and 3. Answers were not obtained for all questions from all patients. When results of all assays were negative, we recontacted physicians in charge of patients to enquire about any neoplasic or automimmune disease that would have been diagnosed elsewhere. The study was approved by the local ethics committee under reference 07–015. The study was also approved by the Commission Nationale Informatique et Libertés under reference 1223186. Diagnostic Procedures Serological analysis. Indirect immunofluorescence assays to detect significant levels of antibodies to C. burnetii (phase I immunoglobulin [Ig] G titer, 11:800), Bartonella quintana, Bartonella henselae (IgG titer, ⭓1:800), and L. pneumophila (total antibody titer, ⭓1:256) were performed as previously described [3]. Specific antibodies to Brucella melitensis and Mycoplasma pneumoniae were detected with an immunoenzymatic antibody test (titer, ⭓1:200) and the Platellia M. pneumoniae IgM kit (Bio-Rad), respectively. Because of a lack of standardization, antibodies to Mycoplasma hominis were not investigated. When results of first-rank tests were negative, we systematically performed Western blot using Bartonella species antigens [16], as described in the Appendix, which appears only in the electronic version of the journal. Molecular detection methods. Bacterial DNA was extracted from surgically excised valves, or EDTA blood when no valve was available, using the QIAmp Tissue kit (QIAGEN) as described by the manufacturer. PCR primers and targets are detailed in Table 4, and PCR and sequencing conditions are described in the Appendix. Primer extension enrichment reaction (PEER) was performed on valvular biopsies from patients for whom results of other tests were negative, as previously described [22, 23]. We used the buffy coat obtained from each patient following antibiotic therapy as control tissue (“driver”). Cell culture. Homogenized cardiac valve specimens suitable for culture—that is, frozen at ⫺80C following surgery and sent in dry ice—and heparinized blood specimens processed in the same way were inoculated onto human endothelial cells (ECV 304) grown in shell vials, as reported elsewhere [24]. Three weeks after inoculation, bacteria detected by Gimenez and acridine orange staining, electron microscopy, or immunofluorescence using the patient’s serum, were identified by amplification and sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene as previously described [8]. Blood Culture–Negative Endocarditis • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • 133 Table 2. Comparison of the Demographic Features and the Involved Cardiac Valves of the 476 Patients with an Etiological Agent Identified with Those of the 73 Definite Patients without any Diagnosis and the 191 Possible Patients Variable Male-to-female ratio Patients with an identified agent (n p 476) Definite patients (n p 73) Possible patients (n p 191) Definite patients Possible patients Definite patients Possible patients Definite patients Possible patients 3.2 1.4 1.9 !.01 !.01 1.1 (1.03–1.2) 1.2 (1.04–1.3) .4 .09 57.9 15.7 60.7 16.0 58.3 17.1 .15 .8 ND !.01 ND .4 ND .2 P by univariate a analysis Relative risk (95% CI) by univariate analysis P by multivariate a,b analysis Age, years Mean SD Median 58 62 59 94.3 94.0 83.4 .6 !.01 1.0 (0.9–1.1) 1.5 (1.1–1.9) Native valve 67.9 63.4 62.6 .5 .3 1.0 (0.9–1.1) 1.0 (0.9–1.2) Bioprosthetic valve 16.7 26.8 15.4 .06 .7 0.9 (0.8–1.0) 1.0 (0.8–1.2) Mechanical valve 8.4 7.0 16.3 .7 .01 1.0 (0.9–1.2) 0.8 (0.6–0.9) Pace-maker 7.0 2.8 13.0 .3 .06 1.1 (1.0–1.2) 0.8 (0.6–1.04) Aortic 45.5 39.4 47.1 .4 .7 1.0 (0.9–1.1) 1.0 (0.9–1.1) Mitral 33.0 43.7 33.3 .1 .9 0.9 (0.8–1.0) 1.0 (0.9–1.1) Aortic and mitral 12.3 11.3 3.2 .8 !.01 1.0 (0.9–1.1) 1.3 (1.1–1.4) 2.0 2.8 1.6 .6 .9 0.9 (0.6–1.3) 1.0 (0.7–1.5) Known preexisting valvular defect Valve involved Tricuspid NOTE. Data are percentage of patients, unless otherwise indicated. CI, confidence interval; ND, not determined. a b P values !.05 are in boldface type. Only variables for which the P value obtained in univariate analysis was ⭐.1 were included in the multivariate logistic regression analysis. Histopathological analysis. Paraffin-embedded heart valves were examined with hematoxylin-eosin for histopathologic features [4]. To detect microorganisms within tissues, the Giemsa, Gram (Brown-Brenn and Brown-Hopps), periodic-acid Schiff, Grocott-Gomori, Warthin-Starry, Gimenez, and Ziehl-Nielsen stains were systematically performed as described elsewhere [25]. For patients for whom results of all other techniques remained negative, we performed autoimmunohistochemistry as previously described [26]. Detection of autoantibodies. Presence of rheumatoid factor, antinuclear antibodies, and anti-DNA antibodies was determined using the Rheumatoid Factor IgM kit (Orgentec), ANA Hep2 kit (BMD), and MuST Connective kit (Inodiag), respectively. Table 3. Comparison of the Clinical Features, Laboratory Results, and Outcome of the 476 Patients with an Etiological Agent Identified to Those of the 73 Definite Patients without any Diagnosis, and the 191 Possible Patients Variable Previous antibiotic therapy Clinical symptoms Fever (temperature, ⭓38.5C) Cardiac murmur Arterial emboli Digital clubbingc Osler nodesc Glomerulonephritisc Laboratory results Leukocytosisc c Anemia Rheumatoid factorc Death Patients with an identified agent (n p 476) Definite patients (n p 73) Possible patients (n p 191) Definite patients Possible patients Definite patients Possible patients Definite patients Possible patients 39.8 63.9 60.6 !.01 !.01 0.9 (0.8–0.9) 0.8 (0.7–0.9) .2 !.01 92.0 72.9 13.3 7.2 1.7 9.4 93.1 79.3 46.5 8.6 1.7 6.9 81.4 68.0 9.0 6.2 0.7 5.5 .8 .3 !.01 .7 .9 .5 !.01 1.4 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 (1.1–1.8) (0.9–1.0) (0.6–0.8) (0.8–1.1) (0.7–1.3) (0.9–1.2) 1.4 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.1 (1.1–1.8) (0.9–1.2) (1.0–1.3) (0.8–1.3) (0.9–1.6) (1.0–1.3) ND !.01 .3 .2 .7 .4 .1 !.01 ND 49.0 51.8 6.9 3.1 51.7 50.0 31.0 6.8 47.2 45.8 11.1 5.8 .7 .8 !.01 .2 .7 .2 .1 .2 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.8 (0.9–1.1) (0.9–1.1) (0.5–0.8) (0.6–1.1) 1.0 1.1 0.8 0.8 (0.9–1.1) (1.0–1.2) (0.6–1.1) (0.5–1.1) !.01 ND P by univariate a analysis Relative risk (95% CI) by univariate analysis P by multivariate analysisa,b NOTE. Data are percentage of patients, unless otherwise indicated. CI, confidence interval; ND, not determined. a b c P values !.05 are in boldface type. Only variables for which the P value obtained in univariate analysis was ⭐.1 were included in the multivariate logistic regression analysis. Data were not available for all patients. 134 • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • Fournier et al Table 4. Primers, Probes, and Polymerase Chain Reaction Conditions Used in This Study Primer name a 536F RP2b Microorganisms detected Nucleotide sequence, 5r3 CAGCAGCCGCGGTAATAC Molecular target Reference All bacteria 16S rRNA [8] TCCGTAGGTGAACCTGCGG GCTGCGTTCTTCATCGATGC Fungi 18S rRNA [17] CAAGAAACGTATCGCTGTGGC Coxiella burnetii htpAB-associated element [18] Bartonella species 16S-23S rRNA spacer [19] Tropheryma whipplei WISP family protein Present study Chlamydia species ompD2 Present study Cytomegalovirus pp65 protein [20] Enteroviruses Polyprotein [21] ACGGCTACCTTGTTACGACTT a CUF b CUR IS1111fa b IS1111R CACAGAGCCACCGTATGAATC c IS1111probe ITS Fa ITS Rb ITSprobec CCGAGTTCGAAACAATGAGGGCTG GGGGCCGTAGCTCAGCTG TGAATATATCTTCTCTTCACAATTTC CGATCCCGTCCGGCTCCACCA a 199F 492Rb GGTTTCTCTGTTACATGTATGTC AACCCTGTCCTGCACCCC c TWprobe ChlamOmp2da ChlamOmp2rb CMV Fa b CMV R CMVprobec a EnteroV F EnteroV Rb EnteroVprobec CTTTGTTATGGAGATTACTTTCTCATCTCC ATGTCCAAACTCATCAGACGAG CCTTCTTTAAGAGGTTTTACCCA GCAGCCACGGGATCGTACT GGCTTTTACCTCACACGAGCATT CGCGAGACCGTGGAACTGCG CCCTGAATGCGGCTAATCC ATTGTCACCATAAGCAGCCA CADGGACACCCAAAGTAGTCGGTTCC NOTE. rRNA, ribosomal RNA; WISP, WNT1-inducible-signaling pathway. a b c Forward primer. Reverse primer. 5-FAM–3-TAMRA probe. Statistical Methods To identify the variables associated with absence of diagnosis, we compared the 476 patients with an identified etiological agent with the 73 definite patients without etiological agents and with the 191 possible patients, using the Mantel-Haenszel x2 test. Mean ages were compared using the Anova and Bartlett’s tests. The variables independently associated with the negativity of all diagnostic tests were identified using an unconditional logistic regression analysis (Tables 2 and 3 and the Supplementary Results in the Appendix). We also compared the diagnoses obtained by our strategy with those of other published BCNE series, using the Mantel-Haenszel x2 test. All tests were performed using the EPI info software, version 3.3.2 (http://www.cdc.gov/epiinfo/index.htm). Observed differences were considered significant when P was !.05 for 2-tailed tests. RESULTS Patients. Specimens from 819 new patients from France or abroad were included in this study (Figure 1). By using the modified Duke criteria [15], 60 patients (7.3%) were excluded from the diagnosis of endocarditis, including 57 who did not meet criteria for possible endocarditis, and 3 for whom histopathological results identified angiosarcoma (2 patients ) and a myxoma of the left atrium (1 patient). Among the remaining 759 patients with endocarditis, 19 (2.5%) were classified as having noninfective endocarditis. Among these, histopathology identified a marantic endocarditis, Libmann-Sacks endocarditis, and Behcet disease in 7, 4, and 1 cases, respectively. Subsequently, by evaluating the presence of antinuclear antibodies of 129 of 290 patients for whom results of all assays were negative and by calling their physicians in charge, we identified an additional 7 patients in whom a diagnosis of autoimmune disease had been done elsewhere using diagnostic criteria [27, 28], including 5 patients with Libmann-Sacks endocarditis and 2 with rheumatic arthritis. Of the 740 patients putatively classified as having infective endocarditis, 549 (74.2%) were classified as having definite endocarditis using the Duke criteria [15], including 476 for whom our diagnostic strategy allowed identification of an infectious agent (Table A1 in the online Appendix), and 73 for whom no etiological agent could be found. The remaining 191 patients (25.8%) were classified as possible patients. The epidemiological data of the 740 patients with definite or possible endocarditis are presented in Table 1. Diagnostic procedures. Serological analysis using immunofluorescence assay provided a diagnosis for 356 (47.8%) of 745 tested patients (Figure 2). Chronic Q fever (IgG titer to Blood Culture–Negative Endocarditis • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • 135 Figure 2. Diagnostic tests applied to clinical specimens for identification of causative agents of blood culture–negative endocarditis. Agents include Tropheryma whipplei. AIHC, autoimmunohistochemistry; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; PEER, primer extension enrichment reaction; rRNA, ribosomal RNA. phase I C. burnetii, 11:800) was diagnosed in 274 patients (77%). Eighty patients (22.5%) had an IgG titer to B. quintana and/or B. henselae ⭓1:800 (Table A1). One patient had a titer of 1:2048 to L. pneumophila and a positive result of L. pneumophila urinary antigen assay. One patient had a titer of 1:256 to Legionella anisa and was later diagnosed as having L. longbeachae endocarditis on the basis of both culture and PCR of a valvular biopsy. Among the patients for whom no diagnosis was obtained with other tests, serum was available for Bartonella Western blot for 148 patients. For these patients, a diagnosis of B. quintana infection was obtained for 4 patients who were seronegative using immunofluorescence assay. Additionally, 16S ribosomal DNA (rDNA) and 18S rDNA PCR assays performed on EDTA blood provided diagnoses for 35 (13.6%) and 1 (0.4%) of 257 patients, respectively. Also, 16S rDNA and 18S rDNA PCR assays of valvular specimens were positive for 150 (66.1%) and 7 (3.0%) of 227 patients, respectively (Table A1). PCR amplification of C. burnetii, Bartonella species, and Tropheryma whipplei was positive for 16, 12, and 5 EDTA blood specimens, respectively, and for 30, 26 and 17 valvular biopsies, respectively. Results for negative controls were in all assays. Overall, PCR identified a causative agent in 109 seronegative patients, including 106 by PCR of valvular specimens and 3 by PCR of blood only. PCR assays for cytomegalovirus, enteroviruses, and C. pneumoniae were negative for all tested specimens. PEER, performed on 49 valvular biopsies from patients for whom all other diagnostic methods failed to identify a causative agent, identified a microorganism 136 • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • Fournier et al in 4 patients: Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Micrococcus luteus, Candida dubliniensis, and Cryptococcus laurentii. Sequences obtained from these microorganisms have been deposited in GenBank under accession numbers EU139422, EU139419, EU139420, and EU139421, respectively. Results for negative controls remained negative. Cell culture of heparinized blood allowed bacterial recovery in 7 (4.1%) of 169 patients. When applied to valvular biopsies, culture was positive for 58 (45.7%) of 127 patients. Culture did not provide any diagnosis that was not made by another method. Detailed results are presented in Table A1. Culture and PCR of valvular biopsies (positive for 58 of 127 patients and 157 of 227 patients, respectively) were significantly more sensitive than were culture and PCR of blood (positive for 7 of 169 patients and 36 of 257 patients, respectively; P ! .01 for both). In addition, PCR was significantly more sensitive than was culture for valvular biopsies (P ! .01 ). The sensitivity of our diagnostic strategy (478 etiological agents identified among 740 patients [64.6%]) was significantly higher than that obtained for a previous series from France (15 [17.0%] of 88; P ! .01), Great Britain (31 [49.2%] of 63; P p .01), and Algeria (28 [45.1%] of 62; P ! .01) but was significantly smaller than that obtained for our previous series from France (271 [77.9%] of 348; P ! .01) (Table 5). However, in the latter study, we had considered only patients classified as having definite endocarditis and identified an agent different from C. burnetii and Bartonella species in only 5 patients, compared with 110 patients in the present study (P ! .01). Presence of rheumatoid factor was detected in 73 patients. Among 115 tested patients without diagnosis, antinuclear antibodies were found in 10, including 5 who also had anti-DNA antibodies. By contacting the physicians in charge of these 10 patients, we had confirmation that 5 patients received a diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus and 2 received a diagnosis of rheumatic fever. Histopathological examination of valvular biopsies enabled the diagnosis of an angiosarcoma and a myxoma of the left atrium in 2 and 1 patients, respectively, and a diagnosis of noninfective endocarditis in 12 patients: marantic endocarditis in 7, Libman-Sachs endocarditis in 4, and cardiac involvement of Behcet disease in 1. Valvular and serum specimens suitable for autoimmunohistochemistry were available from 52 patients without any identified etiology. Results were negative except for 1 patient in whom cocci were observed (Figure 3). However, results of all other tests performed on this surgically excised valve, including PEER, 16S rDNA PCR, and 18S rDNA PCR, remained negative. DISCUSSION In the present series, in an effort to increase our detection sensitivity for the diagnosis of BCNE, we used a multimodal diagnostic strategy, including validated methods for the identification of endocarditis agents, assays newly applied for this purpose, and assays for the detection of microorganisms of uncertain role. Our study, in addition to reporting the largest diagnostic series of BCNE to date and the largest series of PCR detection from valvular biopsies, identified a causative microbial agent in 476 (62.7%) of 759 tested patients with BCNE and a high incidence of noninfective endocarditis (2.5%). Our current strategy allowed the identification of a significantly greater variety of etiological agents than was identifed in a previous series from our laboratory (P ! .01 ) [3]. However, new techniques introduced in this study to detect new agents, such as autoimmunohistochemistry and PEER, were disappointing. Apart from serological analysis by immunofluorescence assay, which provided the greatest number of diagnoses (356 [74.8%] of 476) (Table A1), PCR was the second most efficient diagnostic method and provided a diagnosis for 109 patients for whom serological results were negative. However, the PCR output varied depending on specimens. When applied to blood, 16S rRNA amplification exhibited a poor sensitivity, with 35 positive specimens of 257 tested (13.6%). This low sensitivity was also recently reported by Casalta et al [32]. In contrast, dedicated real-time PCR assays targeting small DNA fragments and using fluorescent probes exhibited a high sensitivity for Bartonella species, C. burnetii, and T. whipplei, as previously described [33]. However, in our study, PCR of blood did not provide any additional diagnosis of Q fever with regard to serological analysis. Therefore, our data suggest that dedicated real-time PCR assays, in particular those targeting Bartonella species and T. whipplei, might be valuable for use on EDTA blood, in particular for patients for whom valvular biopsies are not available. In addition, by using a broad-range, 18S rRNA– based PCR assay targeting fungi, we identified a Penicillium Table 5. Comparison of Microorganisms Identified in Published Series of Blood Culture–Negative Endocarditis Study by location [reference] a Present study (n p 740) France [3] (n p 348) France [29] (n p 88) Great Britain [30] (n p 63) Algeria [31] (n p 62) Bartonella species Brucella melitensis 12.4 0 28.4 0 0 0 9.5 0 22.6 1.6 Chlamydia species Corynebacterium species 0 0.5 0 0 2.2 1.1 1.6 0 0 1.6 7.9 12.7 3.2 Microorganism Coxiella burnetii 37.0 48 Enterobacteriaceae 0.5 0 0 HACEK bacteria Staphylococcus species 0.5 2.0 0 0 0 3.4 0 11.1 3.2 6.4 Streptococcus species 4.4 0 1.1 6.3 3.2 Tropheryma whipplei 2.6 0.3 0 0 0 Other bacteria 3.0 1.1 1.1 1.6 1.6 Fungi 1.0 0 0 6.3 1.6 36.5 22.1 82.9 50.8 54.8 No etiology 0 0 NOTE. Data are percentages. HACEK, Haemophilus, Actinobacillus, Cardiobacterium, Eikenella, Kingella. a Patients classified as excluded were not included in this analysis. Blood Culture–Negative Endocarditis • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • 137 Figure 3. a, Immunohistochemical detection of bacteria from the cardiac valve of a patient with culture-negative endocarditis, using the patient’s serum. Note the extracellular location of bacteria revealed by the peroxidase method and hematoxylin counterstain (original magnification, 400⫻). b, Immunohistochemical detection of Tropheryma whipplei in a resected cardiac valve from a patient with a Whipple endocarditis, using a rabbit polyclonal antibody and hematoxylin counterstain. Note the intracellular location of the bacteria in the macrophage cytoplasm (original magnification, 200⫻). c, Immunohistochemical detection of Coxiella burnetii in a resected cardiac valve from a patient with Q fever endocarditis, using a mouse monoclonal antibody and hematoxylin counterstain. Note the intracellular location of the bacteria in the macrophage cytoplasm (original magnification, 400⫻). d, Immunohistochemical detection of Bartonella henselae in a resected cardiac valve from a patient with Bartonella endocarditis, using a rabbit polyclonal antibody and hematoxylin counterstain. Note the extracellular location of the bacteria in the valvular vegetation (original magnification, 400⫻). species as an agent in a patient. To date, PCR assays targeting fungi have been used in a limited number of studies [9, 11]. Given the fact that these agents are not covered by most empirical antibiotic therapies used for BCNE, we propose that this assay should form part of the diagnostic strategy for BCNE. Valvular biopsies, when available, proved to be of great diagnostic value, allowing the detection of a microorganism in 157 patients. The 16S rDNA and 18S rDNA PCR assays of valves were positive for 150 (66.1%) and 7 (3.0%) of 227 patients, respectively (Table A1). In recent studies, broad-range PCR for bacteria was demonstrated to be highly valuable for valvular specimens [3, 6–11, 14], with the identification of streptococci and fastidious bacteria as main agents (Table 5). 138 • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • Fournier et al In our study, the main bacterial agents identified by PCR were streptococci (mainly Streptococcus gallolyticus), T. whipplei, Bartonella species, and staphylococci. These diagnoses suggest that, unlike for blood specimens, broad-range PCR may be preferred as the first-line test for valvular specimens. We detected no viral agent or Chlamydia species. Among assays newly applied for this purpose, Western blot for Bartonella species, PEER, and autoimmunohistochemistry provided a diagnosis for 4, 4, and 1 patients, respectively, for whom results of all other methods were negative. Such findings suggest that these methods should be considered only when others fail. Of the identified agents, zoonotic bacteria were the most frequent (Supplementary Comments and Table A1 in the Ap- pendix). C. burnetii was the main identified etiological agent (57.3%), followed by Bartonella species (19.2%). Because we acknowledge the fact that this prevalence may be caused by a sampling bias, we differentiated patients from Marseille and those from other hospitals (Table A1). In both populations, C. burnetii and Bartonella species were predominant, accounting for 46.0% and 15.1% of identified agents in Marseille, respectively, and for 61.4% and 20.7% of identified agents in other hospitals, respectively. Such results confirm the role of C. burnetii as a major agent of BCNE in France and other countries [29, 30, 34, 35], followed by Bartonella species. For these agents, the diagnosis was mostly obtained by serological analysis, which demonstrates the necessity to systematically include antibody detection for C. burnetii and Bartonella species in the diagnosis of BCNE (Figure 2) [36]. Other fastidious bacteria, such as T. whipplei (4.0%), Legionella species (0.4%), mycobacteria (0.4%), M. hominis (0.2%), Gemella morbillorum (0.2%), and Abiotrophia defectiva (0.2%) accounted for 5.4% of identified agents. Fungi were identified in 8 patients (1.7%). In previous series of BCNE, fungi accounted for up to 6.3% of patients [30], which suggests the need to systematically search for these microorganisms in BCNE. The usual bacteria that may have been inactivated by early antibiotic therapy, in particular streptococci (6.9%) and staphylococci (3.1%), accounted for 16.5% of cases. The role of antibiotics in the absence of diagnosis, well-recognized in previous studies [37–39], was emphasized by our statistical analysis (P ! .01 ) (Table 3). Among streptococci, S. gallolyticus was the main species (1.9% of microorganisms), exclusively detected in elderly patients. An unexpected finding of our study was the identification of 19 patients with noninfective endocarditis, including 7 cases of marantic and 9 cases of Libmann-Sacks endocarditis. As a matter of fact, in a preliminary study, the demonstration of a significant association between an elevated rheumatoid factor rate and absence of diagnosis, as observed in our statistical analysis (P ! .01) (Table 3), motivated us to evaluate the presence of antinuclear antibodies and to call physicians of patients without identified etiology and enabled the retrospective identification of 5 more patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and 2 with rheumatoid arthritis. These data demonstrate that the BCNE picture may include cases of nonbacterial thrombotic endocarditis associated with cancers and autoimmune diseases [4, 40–42]. To the best of our knowledge, the prevalence of noninfective etiologies of endocarditis has not previously been evaluated. In our study, noninfective endocarditis accounted for 2.5% of cases of BCNE. Our results support the usefulness of a systematic detection of rheumatoid factor and antinuclear antibodies, as well as histopathological analysis of all valvular biopsies taken from patients with suspected endocarditis. On the basis of our results, we propose a refined strategy for the diagnosis of BCNE (Figure 2). Serum should be considered a priority specimen, with Q fever and Bartonella serological analysis being systematic, followed by specific PCR assays for Bartonella species, T. whipplei, and fungi. Other serological analyses, Bartonella-specific Western blot, and broad-range PCR of blood [32] should be reserved for patients with negative results. We also suggest that detection of antinuclear antibodies and rheumatoid factor should be systematic [43]. When available, valvular biopsies should first be tested using broad-range PCR assays for bacteria and fungi, with autoimmunohistochemistry being reserved for patients without any identified diagnosis. Finally, given the poor sensitivity of commercially available PCR kits for detection in blood [32], we believe that highly sensitive PCR assays specifically targeting staphylococci and streptococci, in particular S. gallolyticus, may be valuable detection tools for blood specimens in the future. Acknowledgments We thank Carine Almani, Karine Puggioni, and Marielle Bedotto for technical help. Financial support. Protocole Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique Régional 2005. Potential conflicts of interest. D.R. is cofounder of the biotechnology company Inodiag (http://www.inodiag.com) and is inventor of a patent on a serological diagnostic method for endocarditis held by the Université de la Méditerranée, which was not used in this study. All other authors: no conflicts. References 1. Brouqui P, Raoult D. Endocarditis due to rare and fastidious bacteria. Clin Microbiol Rev 2001; 14:177–207. 2. Raoult D, Casalta JP, Richet H, et al. Contribution of systematic serological testing in diagnosis of infective endocarditis. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43:5238–42. 3. Houpikian P, Raoult D. Blood culture-negative endocarditis in a reference center: etiologic diagnosis of 348 cases. Medicine (Baltimore) 2005; 84:162–73. 4. Lepidi H, Durack DT, Raoult D. Diagnostic methods current best practices and guidelines for histologic evaluation in infective endocarditis. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2002; 16:339–61. 5. Greub G, Lepidi H, Rovery C, et al. Diagnosis of infectious endocarditis in patients undergoing valve surgery. Am J Med 2005; 118:230–8. 6. Podglajen I, Bellery F, Poyart C, et al. Comparative molecular and microbiologic diagnosis of bacterial endocarditis. Emerg Infect Dis 2003; 9: 1543–7. 7. Breitkopf C, Hammel D, Scheld HH, Peters G, Becker K. Impact of a molecular approach to improve the microbiological diagnosis of infective heart valve endocarditis. Circulation 2005; 111:1415–21. 8. Goldenberger D, Kunzli A, Vogt P, Zbinden R, Altwegg M. Molecular diagnosis of bacterial endocarditis by broad-range PCR amplification and direct sequencing. J Clin Microbiol 1997; 35:2733–9. 9. Grijalva M, Horvath R, Dendis M, Erny J, Benedik J. Molecular diagnosis of culture negative infective endocarditis: clinical validation in a group of surgically treated patients. Heart 2003; 89:263–8. 10. Bosshard PP, Kronenberg A, Zbinden R, Ruef C, Bottger EC, Altwegg M. Etiologic diagnosis of infective endocarditis by broad-range polymerase chain reaction: a 3-year experience. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37: 167–72. 11. Millar B, Moore J, Mallon P, et al. Molecular diagnosis of infective endocarditis—a new Duke’s criterion. Scand J Infect Dis 2001; 33:673–80. 12. Gauduchon V, Chalabreysse L, Etienne J, et al. Molecular diagnosis of Blood Culture–Negative Endocarditis • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • 139 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. infective endocarditis by PCR amplification and direct sequencing of DNA from valve tissue. J Clin Microbiol 2003; 41:763–6. Berlot G, Bussani R. Cytomegalovirus endocarditis: a case report and a review of the literature. Minerva Anestesiol 2003; 69:801–5. Rovery C, Greub G, Lepidi H, et al. PCR detection of bacteria on cardiac valves of patients with treated bacterial endocarditis. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43:163–7. Li JS, Sexton DJ, Mick N, et al. Proposed modifications to the Duke criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis 2000;30: 633–8. Houpikian P, Raoult D. Western immunoblotting for Bartonella endocarditis. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2003; 10:95–102. White TJ, Bruns T, Lee S, Taylor JW. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ, eds. PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. New York: Academic Press, 1990:315–22. Willems H, Thiele D, Frolich-Ritter R, Krauss H. Detection of Coxiella burnetii in cow’s milk using the polymerase chain reaction. Zentralbl Veterinarmed B 1994; 41:580–7. Roux V, Raoult D. Inter-and intraspecies identification of Bartonella (Rochalimea) species. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33:1573–9. Griscelli F, Barrois M, Chauvin S, Lastere S, Bellet D, Bourhis JH. Quantification of human cytomegalovirus DNA in bone marrow transplant recipients by real-time PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2001; 39:4362–9. Watkins-Riedel T, Woegerbauer M, Hollemann D, Hufnagl P. Rapid diagnosis of enterovirus infections by real-time PCR on the LightCycler using the TaqMan format. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2002; 42:99–105. Ganova-Raeva L, Zhang X, Cao F, Fields H, Khudyakov Y. Primer extension enrichment reaction (PEER): a new subtraction method for identification of genetic differences between biological specimens. Nucleic Acids Res 2006; 34:e76. Biagini P, de Lamballerie X, de Micco P. Effective detection of highly divergent viral genomes in infected cell lines using a new subtraction strategy (primer extension enrichment reaction—PEER). J Virol Methods 2007; 139:106–10. Raoult D, Vestris G, Enea M. Isolation of 16 strains of Coxiella burnetii from patients by using a sensitive centrifugation cell culture system and establishment of strains in HEL cells. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28: 2482–4. Bruneval P, Choucair J, Paraf F, et al. Detection of fastidious bacteria in cardiac valves in cases of blood culture negative endocarditis. J Clin Pathol 2001; 54:238–40. Lepidi H, Coulibaly B, Casalta JP, Raoult D. Autoimmunohistochemistry: a new method for the histologic diagnosis of infective endocarditis. J Infect Dis 2006; 193:1711–7. Hochberg MC. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40:1725. Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA, et al. The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1988; 31:315–24. Hoen B, Selton-Suty C, Lacassin F, et al. Infective endocarditis in 140 • CID 2010:51 (15 July) • Fournier et al 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. patients with negative blood cultures: analysis of 88 cases from a oneyear nationwide survey in France. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 20:501–6. Lamas CC, Eykyn SJ. Blood culture negative endocarditis: analysis of 63 cases presenting over 25 years. Heart 2003; 89:258–62. Benslimani A, Fenollar F, Lepidi H, Raoult D. Bacterial zoonoses and infective endocarditis, Algeria. Emerg Infect Dis 2005; 11:216–24. Casalta JP, Gouriet F, Roux V, Thuny F, Habib G, Raoult D. Evaluation of the LightCycler SeptiFast test in the rapid etiologic diagnosis of infectious endocarditis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2009; 28:569–73. Fenollar F, Lepidi H, Raoult D. Whipple’s endocarditis: review of the literature and comparisons with Q fever, Bartonella infection, and blood culture–positive endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33:1309–16. Scott JW, Baddour LM, Tleyjeh IM, Moustafa S, Sun YG, Mookadam F. Q fever endocarditis: the Mayo Clinic experience. Am J Med Sci 2008; 336:53–7. Marin M, Munoz P, Sanchez M, et al. Molecular diagnosis of infective endocarditis by real-time broad-range polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and sequencing directly from heart valve tissue. Medicine (Baltimore) 2007; 86:195–202. Raoult D, Abbara S, Jassal DS, Kradin RL. Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Case 5–2007: a 53-year-old man with a prosthetic aortic valve and recent onset of fatigue, dyspnea, weight loss, and sweats. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:715–25. Grace CJ, Lieberman J, Pierce K, Littenberg B. Usefulness of blood culture for hospitalized patients who are receiving antibiotic therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32:1651–5. Branger S, Casalta JP, Habib G, Collard F, Raoult D. Escherichia coli endocarditis: seven new cases in adults and review of the literature. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 24:537–41. Werner M, Andersson R, Olaison L, Hogevik H. A 10-year survey of blood culture negative endocarditis in Sweden: aminoglycoside therapy is important for survival. Scand J Infect Dis 2008; 40:279–85. Asopa S, Patel A, Khan OA, Sharma R, Ohri SK. Non-bacterial thrombotic endocarditis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2007; 32:696–701. DeLong CE, Roldan CA. Noninfective endocarditis in rheumatoid arthritis. Am J Med 2007; 120:e1–2. Horino T, Takao T, Taniguchi Y, Terada Y. Non-infectious endocarditis in a patient with cANCA-associated small vessel vasculitis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2009; 48:592–4. Gouriet F, Bothelo-Nevers E, Coulibaly B, Raoult D, Casalta JP. Evaluation of sedimentation rate, rheumatoid factor, C-reactive protein, and tumor necrosis factor for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Clin Vaccine Immunol 2006; 13:301. Fenollar F, Fournier PE, Carrieri MP, Habib G, Messana T, Raoult D. Risks factors and prevention of Q fever endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33:312–6. Brouqui P, Raoult D. New insight into the diagnosis of fastidious bacterial endocarditis. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 2006; 47:1–13. Fournier PE, Lelievre H, Eykyn SJ, et al. Epidemiologic and clinical characteristics of Bartonella quintana and Bartonella henselae endocarditis: a study of 48 patients. Medicine (Baltimore) 2001; 80:245–51. Pierrotti LC, Baddour LM. Fungal endocarditis, 1995–2000. Chest 2002; 122:302–10.