Page 12 of 13

MI3.1-9 | Bloodstream & Cardiovascular Infections — Case Study

CLINICAL SCENARIO

A 58-year-old farmer from rural Karnataka presents to a tertiary care hospital with a 6-week history of insidious-onset fever (low-grade, 37.8–38.5°C), progressive fatigue, weight loss of 4 kg, and mild dyspnoea on exertion. He underwent dental extraction 10 weeks ago. On examination: temperature 38.2°C, pulse 88 bpm, BP 118/72 mmHg, new soft diastolic murmur at the aortic area. Splenomegaly is palpable 2 cm below the costal margin. He has Osler's nodes on his fingertips and Roth spots on fundoscopy. He was started on oral amoxicillin-clavulanate by a local doctor 4 weeks ago and stopped it 1 week before this presentation.

Investigations so far:
- Haemoglobin: 9.8 g/dL (normocytic normochromic)
- TLC: 11,200 cells/μL, neutrophilia
- ESR: 88 mm/hour; CRP: 48 mg/L
- Serum creatinine: 1.4 mg/dL
- Urinalysis: microscopic haematuria, RBC casts
- Blood cultures (×3, drawn over 24 hours): No growth at 5 days
- Transthoracic echocardiography: Aortic valve thickening, possible 6 mm vegetation, mild aortic regurgitation

Instructions

Analyse this case of culture-negative infective endocarditis (CNIE) from a clinical microbiology perspective. Your response should demonstrate integrated reasoning — not just factual recall.

Word guidance: 600–800 words across all sections.

Complete all four sections in order. Use the headings provided.

Length: 600-800 words

What to Submit

Section 1: Applying Duke's Criteria

Using the modified Duke's criteria, classify this patient's case as Definite, Possible, or Rejected IE. List each criterion satisfied (major and/or minor) and justify your classification with specific findings from the case.

Guidance: Consider both microbiological and echocardiographic major criteria. Note that the blood cultures are negative — does this prevent a classification of Definite or Possible IE? Count each satisfied criterion carefully.

Section 2: Why Are the Cultures Negative?

Enumerate at least THREE reasons why blood cultures may be sterile in this patient despite clinically active IE. For each reason, explain the underlying mechanism and how it applies specifically to this case.

Guidance: Think about prior antibiotics, fastidious organisms, intracellular pathogens, and other technical factors. Consider the patient's occupation and rural background as a clue to specific organisms. Relate each reason back to the case details provided.

Section 3: Targeted Laboratory Strategy

Propose a step-by-step laboratory investigation strategy to identify the causative organism in this CNIE case. Include: (a) the most important pre-analytical step before re-drawing blood cultures, (b) at least two specific serological tests relevant to this patient's background, and (c) one molecular/PCR-based approach.

Guidance: Prioritise investigations in sequence: what must happen first? Think about which serological tests are relevant to a rural Karnataka farmer — Coxiella burnetti (Q fever), Brucella, Bartonella. For PCR, consider what specimen source would be most useful in the absence of positive blood cultures.

Section 4: Complications Already Present

Identify THREE complications of IE that are already apparent in this patient's clinical and laboratory findings. For each complication, name the pathological mechanism and link it to a specific finding in the case.

Guidance: Look carefully at: renal function, urinalysis, haematological findings, and the peripheral stigmata. Mechanisms include: immune complex deposition, septic embolism, and haematogenous seeding.

Grading Rubric — Culture-Negative Endocarditis Case Study Rubric (30 points)

Criterion	Points	Full-marks descriptor
Duke's Criteria Classification (Section 1): Correct identification and listing of satisfied criteria with accurate classification	8 pts	Correctly classifies as Possible or Definite IE; accurately identifies all applicable major criteria (echo finding, persistent bacteraemia criteria context) and minor criteria (fever, predisposing condition, vascular phenomena, immunological phenomena); explains why culture-negative status affects classification.
Culture-Negative IE Mechanisms (Section 2): Quality and accuracy of three or more reasons with case-specific application	8 pts	Three or more valid, distinct mechanisms explained with correct underlying pathophysiology; each mechanism linked specifically to case details (prior antibiotics, rural exposure, fastidious organisms); mentions specific organisms relevant to Indian rural context (Coxiella, Brucella, Bartonella).
Investigation Strategy (Section 3): Logical sequencing and appropriate test selection	8 pts	Correctly identifies antibiotic cessation (minimum 48–72 hours) as the critical pre-analytical step; names two appropriate serological tests with rationale (e.g., Coxiella phase I/II IgG, Brucella agglutination, Bartonella IgG); correctly identifies valve tissue PCR (if surgery planned) or broad-range 16S rRNA PCR on blood as the molecular approach; logical sequence presented.
Complications Identified (Section 4): Accuracy of complications and mechanism-finding linkage	6 pts	Three distinct complications identified (e.g., immune complex glomerulonephritis from RBC casts/haematuria; embolic phenomena from Roth spots/Osler nodes; anaemia of chronic infection from normocytic normochromic anaemia); each linked to correct mechanism and specific case finding.

PEER REVIEW

You are reviewing a peer's response to the culture-negative IE case study. Provide constructive feedback in 150–200 words covering: (1) Whether their Duke's criteria classification is correct and complete — did they miss any satisfied criteria? (2) Are the mechanisms for culture-negative cultures accurate and case-specific, or generic? (3) Is the investigation strategy logically sequenced with the pre-analytical step addressed? (4) Are the complications correctly linked to specific findings? Identify one strength and one area for improvement. Be specific — reference the case findings and criteria names in your feedback.