Question for all of you....

[worktheday]

Hello all,

I hope this finds you in good health. With that said I have a question for all of you. Just a brief background, I am 36, found out around 28 I was going to need AVR replacement at some point, had AVR replacement at 32.

A number of weeks ago a distant friend, I'd say even an aquaintance, told me she was in the hospital (this was all through texting). She went on to say that she had....and I'm using her words "a staff infection on her heart valve". Now I dont know if she meant to say she got a staff infection and it spread to her valve, but that was what she said. She went on to say she had just found out and they had admitted her into the hospital and that she was going to be in for "4-6 weeks" on an IV drip to fight the infection. She even at the time had a date she was "supposed" to be getting released. This date for release was about 5 weeks after she had initially told me of being admitted. I had questioned her as to the details surrounding the issue a number of times..."how did they find it, how could they tell you you'd be in for a set amount of time, etc", but never received what I felt was a believable response. We are not located in the same area and I am not able to physically visit.

I know that in my own research, with my own condition over a few years between finding out about my infected valve and the date that i had to have surgery, I have never come across a story quite like this. Im not sure what to make of it. I know this all probably sounds a little strange and more to the point "why dont you just ask her directly what is going on", but i feel like i have done that and havent really gotten anywhere.

My question to all of you is have you ever heard of a similair story, finding an infection with no details, being admitted and told you were going to be in the hospital for 4-6 weeks on antibiotics, given a date of release weeks before (that has actually come and passed and she is still in the hospital), or anything of the like? It all sounds very foreign to me and i wonder if there is more, or something else to it. Again from my own investigating during my time with my condition, I havent heard of someone finding they had an infection on the valve without it already being damaged (im assuming), treating it with antibiotics in the hospital for a month and a half straight, then it being corrected and released.

Any information you may be able to respond with would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for reading and I hope to hear back from a number of you.

Jay

 

[PetraS]

Hi Jay,
I also had acute endocarditis that damaged my mitral valve and had to be replaced. I was placed on IV Rocephin since my first day in a hospital, at that time my cultures were negative, I was being tested for all kinds of bactaria, viruses and fungi, all negative. Had my surgery December 13 2010 and stayed in IV Rocephine for another 6 week afterwards, only as an outpatient, every day I would drive to hospital to get my dose. If your friend's condition has improved, no fevers etc, maybe she can be released and get a home nurse who will distribute the medicine through PICC line or some other type of port. I NEVER had any heart problems prior this infection, I was never diagnosed with mitral valve prolapse. After extensive research I found out that acute endocarditis can attack perfectly normal heart also. It is a very rare condition I must say. Hope your friends will not need any heart surgery. Unfortunatelly I was "given" congestive heart failure in ER by IV saline, they thought originally i was dehydrated due to pneumonia or flu.
Good luck with everything
Petra

 

[Mentu]

Jay, it would be a very bad bacteria indeed that would keep one in an American hospital for that length of time. Unfortunately, there are some very very bad bacteria loose today. As for heart valves, some type of surface damage often accompanies or even initiates the calcification we are familiar with. There has to be a first time.

Larry

Larry

 

[worktheday]

Thank you Larry and Petra forr your reaponses. Still seems like a very unusual case. Still looking for more input. Thank you

 

[Duff Man]

Hello all,

I hope this finds you in good health. With that said I have a question for all of you. Just a brief background, I am 36, found out around 28 I was going to need AVR replacement at some point, had AVR replacement at 32.

A number of weeks ago a distant friend, I'd say even an aquaintance, told me she was in the hospital (this was all through texting). She went on to say that she had....and I'm using her words "a staff infection on her heart valve". Now I dont know if she meant to say she got a staff infection and it spread to her valve, but that was what she said. She went on to say she had just found out and they had admitted her into the hospital and that she was going to be in for "4-6 weeks" on an IV drip to fight the infection. She even at the time had a date she was "supposed" to be getting released. This date for release was about 5 weeks after she had initially told me of being admitted. I had questioned her as to the details surrounding the issue a number of times..."how did they find it, how could they tell you you'd be in for a set amount of time, etc", but never received what I felt was a believable response. We are not located in the same area and I am not able to physically visit.

I know that in my own research, with my own condition over a few years between finding out about my infected valve and the date that i had to have surgery, I have never come across a story quite like this. Im not sure what to make of it. I know this all probably sounds a little strange and more to the point "why dont you just ask her directly what is going on", but i feel like i have done that and havent really gotten anywhere.

My question to all of you is have you ever heard of a similair story, finding an infection with no details, being admitted and told you were going to be in the hospital for 4-6 weeks on antibiotics, given a date of release weeks before (that has actually come and passed and she is still in the hospital), or anything of the like? It all sounds very foreign to me and i wonder if there is more, or something else to it. Again from my own investigating during my time with my condition, I havent heard of someone finding they had an infection on the valve without it already being damaged (im assuming), treating it with antibiotics in the hospital for a month and a half straight, then it being corrected and released.

Any information you may be able to respond with would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for reading and I hope to hear back from a number of you.

Jay

It actually sounds pretty typical. They do some sort of ambulatory drip/pic system now for the antibiotics, so the patient can get back to their life sooner. I imagine her lack of a coherent response was because she just doesn't really know the answers. She's probably not savvy enough to understand what kind of answer you're asking for or even the reasoning behind your confusion.

 

[Adrienne]

Sub-acute endocarditis for me

Sub-acute endocarditis for me

I had sub-acute endocarditis in 2004 caused by streptoccocus virdans (sp??). Although I was only in the hospital for 5 days, I had this automatic contraption and a PICC line (catheter from a vein in the upper arm to the vena cava) which gave me the antibiotics every four (or six - I can't remember now) hours for a month. Although there were a couple of crises because of people not knowing what they were doing, I was soooo glad to be home instead of in the hospital. The bags of penicillin were delivered to me, and I went to this local health centre where they changed the bags, the tubes, etc.

 

[Lynlw]

I'm a little confused did you join just because you doubted what a friend told you about her heart so you want to double check what she told you? FWIW it sounds perfectly normal for someone with an infection in their heart to me.

I'm also confused, when you said you had an infection on your heart that didn't need any treatment/surgery for a few years. Are you sure YOU had an infection or something else like stenosis/calcification, because I rarely if ever heard of anyone having an infection on their heart valve and not needing at least antibiotics for weeks.

 

[Greg a]

Hello all,

I hope this finds you in good health. With that said I have a question for all of you. Just a brief background, I am 36, found out around 28 I was going to need AVR replacement at some point, had AVR replacement at 32.

A number of weeks ago a distant friend, I'd say even an aquaintance, told me she was in the hospital (this was all through texting). She went on to say that she had....and I'm using her words "a staff infection on her heart valve". Now I dont know if she meant to say she got a staff infection and it spread to her valve, but that was what she said. She went on to say she had just found out and they had admitted her into the hospital and that she was going to be in for "4-6 weeks" on an IV drip to fight the infection. She even at the time had a date she was "supposed" to be getting released. This date for release was about 5 weeks after she had initially told me of being admitted. I had questioned her as to the details surrounding the issue a number of times..."how did they find it, how could they tell you you'd be in for a set amount of time, etc", but never received what I felt was a believable response. We are not located in the same area and I am not able to physically visit.

I know that in my own research, with my own condition over a few years between finding out about my infected valve and the date that i had to have surgery, I have never come across a story quite like this. Im not sure what to make of it. I know this all probably sounds a little strange and more to the point "why dont you just ask her directly what is going on", but i feel like i have done that and havent really gotten anywhere.

My question to all of you is have you ever heard of a similair story, finding an infection with no details, being admitted and told you were going to be in the hospital for 4-6 weeks on antibiotics, given a date of release weeks before (that has actually come and passed and she is still in the hospital), or anything of the like? It all sounds very foreign to me and i wonder if there is more, or something else to it. Again from my own investigating during my time with my condition, I havent heard of someone finding they had an infection on the valve without it already being damaged (im assuming), treating it with antibiotics in the hospital for a month and a half straight, then it being corrected and released.

Any information you may be able to respond with would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for reading and I hope to hear back from a number of you.

Jay

Jay, a heart felt WELCOME to our OHS family Following is a def of Staph infections

Staphylococcus aureus (pronounced /ˌstæfɨlɵˈkɒkəs ˈɔri.əs/, literally the "golden cluster seed" or "the seed gold" and also known as golden staph and Oro staphira) is a facultative anaerobic, Gram-positive coccus and is the most common cause of staph infections. It is frequently part of the skin flora found in the nose and on skin. About 20% of the human population are long-term carriers of S. aureus.[1] The carotenoid pigment staphyloxanthin is responsible for S. aureus' characteristic golden colour, which may be seen in colonies of the organism. This pigment acts as a virulence factor with an antioxidant action that helps the microbe evade death by reactive oxygen species used by the host immune system. Staph organisms which lack the pigment are more easily killed by host defenses.

S. aureus can cause a range of illnesses from minor skin infections, such as pimples, impetigo, boils (furuncles), cellulitis folliculitis, carbuncles, scalded skin syndrome, and abscesses, to life-threatening diseases such as pneumonia, meningitis, osteomyelitis, endocarditis, toxic shock syndrome (TSS), chest pain, bacteremia, and sepsis. Its incidence is from skin, soft tissue, respiratory, bone, joint, endovascular to wound infections. It is still one of the five most common causes of nosocomial infections, often causing postsurgical wound infections. Abbreviated to S. aureus or Staph aureus in medical literature, S. aureus should not be confused with the similarly named and similarly dangerous (and also medically relevant) species of the genus Streptococcus.

S. aureus was discovered in Aberdeen, Scotland in 1880 by the surgeon Sir Alexander Ogston in pus from surgical abscesses.[2] Each year, some 500,000 patients in American hospitals contract a staphylococcal infection.[3]

AND THIS FOR MRSAs that are common in OHS

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a bacterium responsible for several difficult-to-treat infections in humans. It may also be called multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (ORSA).

MRSA is, by definition, any strain of Staphylococcus aureus bacteria that has developed resistance to beta-lactam antibiotics which include the penicillins (methicillin, dicloxacillin, nafcillin, oxacillin, etc.) and the cephalosporins.

MRSA is especially troublesome in hospitals where patients with open wounds, invasive devices and weakened immune systems are at greater risk of infection than the general public.

I would ask the same questions as Lynn

BUT A BIG WELCOME

 

[Duff Man]

I think the bottom line is that this does not sound uncommon, and for her to know the answer as to why they schedule a set regimine for endocarditis would require her to be a doctor. Like literally, there are protocols based on controlled studies that we as laymen aren't usually aware of. Even if we were aware of the studies, it would be hard for us to formulate a treatment plan or comment intelligently on the reasoning for it. I can only speculate why they do regularly treat acute bacterial endocarditis for so long both in and out of hospital... I reckon it's because it is a very serious thing to have an infection in your body on a piece of tissue that is NOT vascular. Because of the lack of blood flow to the valve interior itself, it can not receive antibiotics in some portions of it, leaving it more vulnerable to infection and lingering infection well after a shorter burst of antibiotics has gone. It's so serious, in fact, that they mainline antibiotics for an extended period of time to ensure the valve is exposed to a copious amount of it.

I almost feel like you're not familiar with what kind of infection you had with your heart. There's different classifications and types of endocarditis. There's acute, subacute, inflammatory, bacterial, etc etc.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocarditis

 

[normofthenorth]

Jay, was your heart problem caused by an infection, or was it a congenital problem? You refer to it as an infection, but if you weren't treated with mega-dose antibiotics, and 4 years passed between diagnosis and valve replacement, it hardly sounds like an infection (=~ endocarditis).

Your friend's situation does sound like that, as others have said. My Dad had several bouts of bacterial endocarditis in his 80s and/or 90s, which he was susceptible to because he had rheumatic fever (I don't mean Scarlet Fever, do I?) as a kid. Each time he got a PICC line inserted, and was given bags and bags of strong antibiotics for a month or so. He was usually shifted from the acute-care hospital to a chronic or rehab hospital after he was stable, and he got the rest of the injections there. In all the cases, it cleared up successfully, without doing enough damage to his heart valves to prevent him surviving (and in pretty good, active, healthy, clear-headed shape) to 98.

 

[ALCapshaw2]

Technically, the term is "staph" infection (NOT staff) which is short for a much longer scientific word beginning with staph.... that I have forgotten.

 

[Luana]

Yes, staph, as in Staphylococcus, of which there are many species and subspecies.

 

[MarkU]

First of all, welcome to the forum. I see you are from Sarasota also. I've been here for 25 years and had my AVR at Sarasota Memorial ten years ago.

To your original question, the situation you describe doesn't seem that unusual. I just had a friend here in Sarasota who developed an infection while he was in ICU after surgery to get a bovine aortic valve. His infection resulted in a high fever and some respiratory problems. He was kept sedated and on a respirator in ICU for the first ten days after surgery until the antibiotics knocked down the infection. He ended up spending five weeks in the hospital. He's at home and doing fine now, but it was quite and ordeal for he and his family.

Again, welcome.

Mark

 

[worktheday]

Thank you all for your responses. I just wanted to first briefly address some questions that were directed to me. Lynn, no I did not just join to "double check on my friend". I have actually been a memeber for nearly 8 years. I had made hundreds of posts in the past. I took a hiatus from the site for a while and upon returning couldnt remember my sign in info. The adminstrators couldnt find it either surprisingly so i had to begin with a new account, hence the lack of posts.

As to the few different questions about my own condition and my statement of "my infected valve", to elaborate I found out about my condition on a regular doctors visit. At 28 my PCP heard a murmer. Sent me to get an echo that day mentioning "it is probably nothing, we've never heard it before, millions of americans have them, etc...". Went had the echo that day, went home, recieved a call from my Primary about two hours later telling me to pack a bag, they were putting me in the hospital. Went in, they explained they found a damaged valve. Spent the next 24 having blood drawn every 4 hours and being tested for infection. They found none and set me home. Followed up with a cardiologist obviously, which it was then that my condition was explained in detail. Had regurg, not stenosis, damaged aortic valve. The parameters for surgery were not where my heart was at that time, so they were going to give me echos every 3 months until that date arrived. They told me they couldnt give an exact date for surgery of course, but an estimate would be within 6 to 12 months of when i was diagnosed. Was put on beta blocker to lessen the workload on my heart, as it happened i didnt need to have surgery until i was 32, nearly 4 years later.

More directly to the questions about me not knowing my own condition, or what type of infection i had or if there was one at all....the reason i said i had an infection was because my surgeon, post surgery, had told me from the look of the damage to the valve that was the best they could summize. Collectively, my doctors couldnt determine how exactly I got the damaged valve. They couldnt believe it was congenital and went unnoticed for 28 years (I had a very well respected Pediatricain, as well as a Primary thereafter), and because of that deduced I must of have gotten the infection at some point in my life without picking up on it and which led to the damge. Hope that answers the questions.

I thank you for the responses so far. Ultimately, I never received an answer from my friend simply as to how the problem was found, or as to her treatment. I was receiving very vague answers, which seemed to be almost evasive. And not because she wasnt comfortable speaking about it, you would of have to of been within the exchange to understand. I dont think it takes a PHD to listen to your doctor tell you how they found it and to repeat that to someone. I am obviousy not a doctor, hence my story and subsequent questions. I wasnt aware that someone could have an infection on a valve in there heart, with no damage, have it be found (not knowing how) and be treated in the hospital with a constant antibiotic drip for 6 weeks, then walk out completely fine. Some of your responses have educated me, which is exactly why i posed the question and greatly appreciate your time in responding.

Any further responses are also welcome. Thank you all again so far who have responded, and hope you are all doing well!

Jay