Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Outreach
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
  • CONFERENCE
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
BJGP Open
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Outreach
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
  • CONFERENCE
Practice & Policy

A change in the NICE guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis: British Heart Valve Society update

John B Chambers, Martin H Thornhill, Mark Dyer and David Shanson
BJGP Open 2017; 1 (1): bjgpopen17X100593. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen17X100593
John B Chambers
1Consultant Cardiologist and Professor of Clinical Cardiology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals, , UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: john.chambers@gstt.nhs.uk
Martin H Thornhill
2Professor of Translational Research in Dentistry, The School of Clinical Dentistry, University of Sheffield, , UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark Dyer
3Consultant Cardiologist, Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust, , UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Shanson
4Honorary Consultant Microbiologist, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, , UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading
  • endocarditis
  • antibiotic prophylaxis
  • dental procedures

Introduction

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has made an important change to Clinical Guideline 64 (CG64)1 adding the word ‘routinely’ to Recommendation 1.1.3: 'Antibiotic prophylaxis against infective endocarditis is not recommended routinely for people undergoing dental procedures.' In a letter about the change to the MP Chris Philp,2 Sir Andrew Dillon, CEO of NICE, confirmed that '… in individual cases, antibiotic prophylaxis may be appropriate.'

Why has this change occurred?

This change followed approaches to Sir Andrew Dillon by Chris Philp and the widow of a patient with a replacement aortic valve who died from infe ctive endocarditis (IE) developing after unprotected dental scaling. Their case included:

  1. Evidence that antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in people at high risk of IE having high risk dental procedures (Box 1). There are no randomised controlled trials. However, a French community study4 showed a 14-fold higher incidence of IE in people with replacement valves having unprotected dental procedures (1/10 700) compared with protected procedures (1/149 000). Horstkotte5 found no cases of IE in 229 people with replacement valves having protected dental procedures compared with 2 of 117 (1.7%) having unprotected procedures. A recent retrospective analysis of hospital-acquired data in the UK6 suggested that 277 patients at all levels of risk needed to have antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent one episode of IE.

  2. The observed increase in the incidence of IE in the UK since the original 2008 NICE guidance was introduced. The risk of IE has been increasing constantly in the US and Europe. However, an interrupted time sequence study6 showed that this rate accelerated in the UK after 2008 with an estimated 35 extra cases of IE every month 5 years after the change above the expected number based on the pre-2008 incidence. This was associated with an 88% fall in prescriptions of antibiotics.

  3. Limitations of the NICE process.3 The NICE process is well-designed for its original purpose of making decisions about the cost-effectiveness of drug therapies or procedures for which randomised controlled trial data are available. However, it is not appropriate for questions of clinical judgement for which other types of evidence exist. NICE assessed only a small proportion of the available evidence and made a number of errors of interpretation including underestimating the risk of patients with prosthetic valves developing IE and underestimating the bacteraemia arising as a result of invasive dental procedures.3 NICE grossly overestimated the risks of antibiotic proyhphylaxis and this contributed to a decision that antibiotic prophylaxis was not cost-effective. In fact adverse effects from oral amoxicillin prophylaxis are uncommon with no deaths reported in Europe since records began7 although clindamicin has a slightly higher level of risk.8 Both are cost-effective in high-risk patients having high-risk dental procedures.8

  4. A change in the law of consent. 9–11 It is now necessary for dentists to appraise their patient of the differences between NICE and other guidelines if it is likely that they would have a special interest, for example, if they have a replacement heart valve or prior IE.12 The patient should then be allowed to make up their own mind whether or not to have antibiotic prophylaxis. General Medical Council/General Dental Council standards and the advice of the medical/dental defence organisations highlight the need for this discussion (and the patient’s decision) to be recorded in the clinical records.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Box 1. Summary of guidance

Is IE caused by poor oral hygiene or dental extractions?

Streptococci account for approximately 40% of cases of IE. There is a tendency to regard the mechanism by which these cause IE as either poor dental hygiene or dental procedures as if these are mutually exclusive. This misunderstanding probably underlies some of the opposition to targeted antibiotic prophylaxis shown by NICE and other commentators. In fact, both mechanisms are likely to contribute. In a recent study,13 68 patients had IE thought to be of oral origin, 60 attributed to poor oral health and eight to dental procedures. The larger proportion of these cases could be prevented by improving dental care, but the smaller proportion would still require antibiotic prophylaxis before the procedure. The person whose death from IE led to the recent approach to NICE had good oral hygiene.

How does this affect clinical practice?

Although the dentist is responsible for consent, the patient will have to be made aware if they are at high-risk of IE and this is the prime responsibility of a cardiologist specialising in valve disease. Patients under continuing cardiac surveillance should expect to receive education,14 and a summary of advice about antibiotic prophylaxis in a letter which can be shown to their dentist. However, many patients with prior endocarditis or replacement valves are cared for solely in the community,15 and for these, the dentist should consider seeking advice from a cardiologist. Sometimes the dentist refuses a patient’s request to have antibiotic prophylaxis although this may become less frequent with the latest modification of NICE guidance. GPs may then be asked to intercede and are often willing to issue a prescription, but otherwise, should seek advice from a cardiologist. Prophylaxis for adults should be with amoxicillin 3 g orally 1 hour before the procedure or, for patients with penicillin hypersensitivity, clindamicin 600 mg orally (Box 1).

Staff in general practices should emphasise that good oral hygiene and regular dental review are as important as antibiotic prophylaxis, if not more so, in reducing the risk of IE.7 The European Society of Cardiology recommend12 strict dental and cutaneous hygiene with regular dental surveillance (Box 1). It is also important to educate patients at moderate and high risk in recognising the possibility of IE. Typically, there may be persistent night sweats, general malaise, and weight loss. At least two sets of blood cultures should be taken before starting antibiotics. The British Heart Foundation produce warning cards that can be given to patients.16

The subtle change makes NICE guidance less dogmatic and allows clinicians to use their clinical judgment, follow well-accepted international guidelines,12 and provide the care their patients want.

Notes

Funding

This research did not receive an specific grand from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Competing interests

The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  • Received August 16, 2016.
  • Accepted September 9, 2016.
  • Copyright © The Authors 2017

This article is Open Access: CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)
    Prophylaxis against infective endocarditis 2015 [NICE Clinical Guideline No 64]. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg64/chapter/Recommendations. accessed 7 Feb 2017.
  2. 2.↵
    1. Thornhill MH,
    2. Dayer M,
    3. Lockhart PB,
    4. et al.
    (2016) A change in the NICE guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis. BDJ 221(3):112–114, doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.554.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Chambers JB,
    2. Thornhill M,
    3. Shanson D,
    4. et al.
    (2016) Antibiotic prophylaxis of endocarditis: a NICE mess. Lancet Infect Dis 16(3):275–276, doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)00048-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Duval X,
    2. Alla F,
    3. Hoen B,
    4. et al.
    (2006) Estimated risk of endocarditis in adults with predisposing cardiac conditions undergoing dental procedures with or without antibiotic prophylaxis. CID 42(12):e102–e107, doi:10.1086/504385.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Horstkotte D,
    2. Rosin H,
    3. Friedrichs W,
    4. et al.
    (1987) Contribution for choosing the optimal prophylaxis of bacterial endocarditis. Eur Heart J 8(suppl J):379–381, doi:10.1093/eurheartj/8.suppl_J.379.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. 6.↵
    1. Dayer MJ,
    2. Jones S,
    3. Prendergast B,
    4. et al.
    (2015) Incidence of infective endocarditis in England, 2000–13: a secular trend, interrupted time-series analysis. Lancet 385(9974):1219–1228, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62007-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Thornhill MH,
    2. Dayer M,
    3. Lockhart PB,
    4. et al.
    (2016) Guidelines on prophylaxis to prevent infective endocarditis. BDJ 220(2):51–56, doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.49.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Thornhill MH,
    2. Dayer MJ,
    3. Prendergast B,
    4. et al.
    (2015) Incidence and nature of adverse reactions to antibiotics used as endocarditis prophylaxis. J Antimicrob Chemother 70(8):2382–2388, doi:10.1093/jac/dkv115.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Edozien LC
    (2015) UK law on consent finally embraces the prudent patient standard. BMJ 350, doi:10.1136/bmj.h2877. h2877.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Main BG,
    2. Adair SR
    (2015) The changing face of informed consent. BDJ 219(7):325–327, doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.754.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Southerland L
    (2015) Montgomery in the Supreme Court: a new legal test for consent to medical treatment: Scottish Legal News. http://www.scottishlegal.com/2015/03/12/montgomery-in-the-supreme-court-a-new-legal-test-for-consent-to-medical-treatment/. accessed 7 Feb 2017.
  12. 12.↵
    1. Habib G,
    2. Lancellotti P,
    3. Antunes MJ,
    4. et al.
    (2015) 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis: The Task Force for the Management of Infective Endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM). Eur Heart J 36(44):3075–3128, doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv319.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Delahaye F,
    2. M'Hammedi A,
    3. Guerpillon B,
    4. et al.
    (2016) Systematic Search for Present and Potential Portals of Entry for Infective Endocarditis. J Am Coll Cardiol 67(2):151–158, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.10.065.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Chambers J,
    2. Sandoe J,
    3. Ray S,
    4. et al.
    (2014) The infective endocarditis team: recommendations from an international working group. Heart 100(7):524–527, doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304354.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Parkin D
    (2012) Routine follow-up for patients with prosthetic valves: the value of a nurse-led valve clinic. Br J Cardiol 19(2):76–78, doi:10.5837/bjc.2012.015.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. 16.↵
    1. British Heart Foundation
    Endocarditis card (19–49 years). https://www.bhf.org.uk/publications/heart-conditions/m26a-endocarditis-card. accessed 7 Feb 2017.
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 1, Issue 1
April 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A change in the NICE guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis: British Heart Valve Society update
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
A change in the NICE guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis: British Heart Valve Society update
John B Chambers, Martin H Thornhill, Mark Dyer, David Shanson
BJGP Open 2017; 1 (1): bjgpopen17X100593. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen17X100593

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
A change in the NICE guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis: British Heart Valve Society update
John B Chambers, Martin H Thornhill, Mark Dyer, David Shanson
BJGP Open 2017; 1 (1): bjgpopen17X100593. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen17X100593
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Introduction
    • Why has this change occurred?
    • Is IE caused by poor oral hygiene or dental extractions?
    • How does this affect clinical practice?
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • endocarditis
  • antibiotic prophylaxis
  • dental procedures

More in this TOC Section

  • Telehealth and primary care: a special collection from BJGP Open
  • Reconsidering the Levesque framework: a social work perspective for healthcare professionals
  • The impact of remote consultations on brief conversations in general practice
Show more Practice & Policy

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

@BJGPOpen's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2023 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795