Short- and long-term follow-up outcomes of patients with Brucella endocarditis: a systematic review of 207 Brucella endocarditis Cases

ABSTRACT

Brucella endocarditis is a fatal complication and the most frequent cause of death for human brucellosis. This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the follow-up outcomes of Brucella endocarditis and analyze the determinants affecting the follow-up outcomes. The databases PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane were searched using keywords and suitable combinations. All studies reporting the follow-up outcomes of Brucella endocarditis were included. Finally, a total of 76 studies (207 patients), including cases or case series, were included. The event rate for patients who underwent short- and long-term follow-up was 12.0% (2 relapsed and 1 died) and 8.1% (6 relapsed and 8 died), respectively. The differences in outcomes between different age groups (18–39, 40–59, and ≥60) were significant (P < 0.05, P = 0.035). The outcomes of the 18–39 age group were worse than those of the 40–59 age group (OR, 0.277; 95% CI, 0.103–0.748; P = 0.011). Accordingly, follow-up (both short- and long-term follow-up) is essential for Brucella endocarditis patients, especially for younger patients (18–39 years) in the first 6 months after treatment. The burden of Brucella endocarditis related complications were immense. Further studies are needed to explore age-based epidemiology of Brucella endocarditis and the exact influencing factors of the follow-up outcomes.

KEYWORDS:

• Brucella endocarditis
• follow-up outcomes
• systematic review
• influencing factors

Highlights

1. The high incidence age of human brucellosis varies by region and occupation.

2. Follow-up outcomes of younger Brucella endocarditis patients may be worse than older patients.

3. There are no differences between short- and long-term follow-up outcomes of Brucella endocarditis patients.

Author contributions

Xiufeng Li and Yuanzhi Wang conceived and designed the article; Songsong Xie searched literatures; Ping Li, Xiufeng Li and Wenbo Tan analyzed the data; Xiufeng Li wrote the paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here