Search

Risk assessment and risk prediction have become essential in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Even though risk prediction tools are recommended in the European guidelines, they are not adequately implemented in clinical practice. Risk prediction tools are meant to estimate prognosis in an unbiased and reliable way and to provide objective information on outcome probabilities. They support informed treatment decisions about the initiation or adjustment of preventive medication. Risk prediction tools facilitate risk communication to the patient and their family, and this may increase commitment and motivation to improve their health. Over the years many risk algorithms have been developed to predict 10-year cardiovascular mortality or lifetime risk in different populations, such as in healthy individuals, patients with established cardiovascular disease and patients with diabetes mellitus. Each risk algorithm has its own limitations, so different algorithms should be used in different patient populations. Risk algorithms are made available for use in clinical practice by means of - usually interactive and online available - tools. To help the clinician to choose the right tool for the right patient, a summary of available tools is provided. When choosing a tool, physicians should consider medical history, geographical region, clinical guidelines and additional risk measures among other things. Currently, the website is the only risk prediction tool providing prediction algorithms for all patient categories, and its implementation in clinical practice is suggested/advised by the European Association of Preventive Cardiology. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: this paper was produced within the framework of the ESC Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Programme which is led by the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC) in collaboration with the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) and the Association of Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions (ACNAP). The ESC Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Programme is supported by unrestricted educational grants. The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Rossello, X (corresponding author), Ctr Nacl Invest Cardiovasc CNIC Carlos III, Melchor Fernandez Almagro 3, Madrid 28029, Spain. fjrossello@cnic.es

International audience; Introduction Infective endocarditis is one of the most difficult-to-treat infectious diseases. Areas covered We restricted this review to the anti-infective treatment of the main bacteria responsible for infective endocarditis, i.e. staphylococci, streptococci, enterococci, and Gram-negative bacilli, including HACEK. Specific topics of major interest in treatment strategy are covered as well, including empirical treatment, oral switch, and treatment duration. We searched in the MEDLINE database to identify relevant studies, trials, reviews, or meta-analyses until May 2020. Expert opinion The use of aminoglycosides for the treatment of endocarditis has been dramatically reduced over the last 20 years. It should be administered once daily, and no longer than 2 weeks. For staphylococcal endocarditis, recent data reinforced the role of anti-staphylococcal penicillins, for methicillin-susceptible isolates (alternative, cefazolin), and vancomycin for methicillin-resistant isolates (alternative, daptomycin). For staphylococcal prosthetic-valve endocarditis, these treatments will be reinforced by the addition of gentamicin during the first 2 weeks, and rifampin throughout the whole treatment duration, i.e. 6 weeks. The optimal duration of antibacterial treatment is 4 weeks for most native valve endocarditis, and 6 weeks for prosthetic-valve endocarditis. The oral switch is safe in patients stabilized after the initial intravenous course.