Andrea Beaton1, Twalib Aliku2, Alyssa Dewyer2, Marni Jacobs2, Jiji Jiang2, Chris T Longenecker2, Sulaiman Lubega2, Robert McCarter2, Mariana Mirabel2, Grace Mirembe2, Judith Namuyonga2, Emmy Okello2, Amy Scheel2, Emmanuel Tenywa2, Craig Sable2, Peter Lwabi2. 1. Children's National Health System, Washington DC (A.B., A.D., M.J., J.J., R.M., A.S., C.S.). Gulu University, Uganda (T.A.). Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (C.T.L.). Uganda Heart Institute, Kampala (S.L., J.N., E.O., E.T., P.L.). INSERM U970 (French National Institute of Health and Medical Research), Paris-Cardiovascular Research Center PARCC, France (M.M.). Joint Clinical Research Centers, Kampala, Uganda (G.M.). abeaton@childrennational.org. 2. Children's National Health System, Washington DC (A.B., A.D., M.J., J.J., R.M., A.S., C.S.). Gulu University, Uganda (T.A.). Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (C.T.L.). Uganda Heart Institute, Kampala (S.L., J.N., E.O., E.T., P.L.). INSERM U970 (French National Institute of Health and Medical Research), Paris-Cardiovascular Research Center PARCC, France (M.M.). Joint Clinical Research Centers, Kampala, Uganda (G.M.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screening echocardiography has emerged as a potentially powerful tool for early diagnosis of rheumatic heart disease (RHD). The utility of screening echocardiography hinges on the rate of RHD progression and the ability of penicillin prophylaxis to improve outcome. We report the longitudinal outcomes of a cohort of children with latent RHD and identify risk factors for unfavorable outcomes. METHODS: This was a prospective natural history study conducted under the Ugandan RHD registry. Children with latent RHD and ≥1 year of follow-up were included. All echocardiograms were re-reviewed by experts (2012 World Heart Federation criteria) for inclusion and evidence of change. Bi- and multivariable logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox proportional hazards models, as well, were developed to search for risk factors for unfavorable outcome and compare progression-free survival between those treated and not treated with penicillin. Propensity and other matching methods with sensitivity analysis were implemented for the evaluation of the penicillin effect. RESULTS: Blinded review confirmed 227 cases of latent RHD: 164 borderline and 63 definite (42 mild, 21 moderate/severe). Median age at diagnosis was 12 years and median follow-up was 2.3 years (interquartile range, 2.0-2.9). Penicillin prophylaxis was prescribed in 49.3% with overall adherence of 84.7%. Of children with moderate-to-severe definite RHD, 47.6% had echocardiographic progression (including 2 deaths), and 9.5% had echocardiographic regression. Children with mild definite and borderline RHD showed 26% and 9.8% echocardiographic progression and 45.2% and 46.3% echocardiographic improvement, respectively. Of those with mild definite RHD or borderline RHD, more advanced disease category, younger age, and morphological mitral valve features were risk factors for an unfavorable outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Latent RHD is a heterogeneous diagnosis with variable disease outcomes. Children with moderate to severe latent RHD have poor outcomes. Children with both borderline and mild definite RHD are at substantial risk of progression. Although long-term outcome remains unclear, the initial change in latent RHD may be evident during the first 1 to 2 years following diagnosis. Natural history data are inherently limited, and a randomized clinical trial is needed to definitively determine the impact of penicillin prophylaxis on the trajectory of latent RHD.
BACKGROUND: Screening echocardiography has emerged as a potentially powerful tool for early diagnosis of rheumatic heart disease (RHD). The utility of screening echocardiography hinges on the rate of RHD progression and the ability of penicillin prophylaxis to improve outcome. We report the longitudinal outcomes of a cohort of children with latent RHD and identify risk factors for unfavorable outcomes. METHODS: This was a prospective natural history study conducted under the Ugandan RHD registry. Children with latent RHD and ≥1 year of follow-up were included. All echocardiograms were re-reviewed by experts (2012 World Heart Federation criteria) for inclusion and evidence of change. Bi- and multivariable logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox proportional hazards models, as well, were developed to search for risk factors for unfavorable outcome and compare progression-free survival between those treated and not treated with penicillin. Propensity and other matching methods with sensitivity analysis were implemented for the evaluation of the penicillin effect. RESULTS: Blinded review confirmed 227 cases of latent RHD: 164 borderline and 63 definite (42 mild, 21 moderate/severe). Median age at diagnosis was 12 years and median follow-up was 2.3 years (interquartile range, 2.0-2.9). Penicillin prophylaxis was prescribed in 49.3% with overall adherence of 84.7%. Of children with moderate-to-severe definite RHD, 47.6% had echocardiographic progression (including 2 deaths), and 9.5% had echocardiographic regression. Children with mild definite and borderline RHD showed 26% and 9.8% echocardiographic progression and 45.2% and 46.3% echocardiographic improvement, respectively. Of those with mild definite RHD or borderline RHD, more advanced disease category, younger age, and morphological mitral valve features were risk factors for an unfavorable outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Latent RHD is a heterogeneous diagnosis with variable disease outcomes. Children with moderate to severe latent RHD have poor outcomes. Children with both borderline and mild definite RHD are at substantial risk of progression. Although long-term outcome remains unclear, the initial change in latent RHD may be evident during the first 1 to 2 years following diagnosis. Natural history data are inherently limited, and a randomized clinical trial is needed to definitively determine the impact of penicillin prophylaxis on the trajectory of latent RHD.
Authors: Rick A Nishimura; Catherine M Otto; Robert O Bonow; Blase A Carabello; John P Erwin; Lee A Fleisher; Hani Jneid; Michael J Mack; Christopher J McLeod; Patrick T O'Gara; Vera H Rigolin; Thoralf M Sundt; Annemarie Thompson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Liesl Zühlke; Mark E Engel; Carolina E Lemmer; Marnie van de Wall; Simpiwe Nkepu; Alet Meiring; Michael Bestawros; Bongani M Mayosi Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2016-02-19 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: Emmy Okello; Zhang Wanzhu; Charles Musoke; Aliku Twalib; Barbara Kakande; Peter Lwabi; Nyakoojo B Wilson; Charles K Mondo; R Odoi-Adome; Juergen Freers Journal: Cardiovasc J Afr Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 1.167
Authors: Sushma Reddy; Bradley S Marino; Carissa M Baker-Smith; Andrea Beaton; Catherine D Krawczeski; Christina Y Miyake; James F Cnota; Andrew C Glatz; Brian Feingold; Jennifer C Romano; Antonio G Cabrera; Anitha S John; Meryl S Cohen Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Jean Jacques Noubiap; Valirie N Agbor; Jean Joel Bigna; Arnaud D Kaze; Ulrich Flore Nyaga; Bongani M Mayosi Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-11-19 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Joshua Reginald Francis; Helen Fairhurst; Gillian Whalley; Alex Kaethner; Anna Ralph; Jennifer Yan; James Cush; Vicki Wade; Andre Monteiro; Bo Remenyi Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Jasper Ubels; Craig Sable; Andrea Z Beaton; Maria Carmo P Nunes; Kaciane K B Oliveira; Lara C Rabelo; Isabella M Teixeira; Gabriela Z L Ruiz; Letícia Maria M Rabelo; Alison R Tompsett; Antonio Luiz P Ribeiro; Klas-Göran Sahlen; Bruno R Nascimento Journal: Glob Heart Date: 2020-02-20
Authors: Luke David Hunter; Mark Monaghan; Guy Lloyd; Carl Lombard; Alfonso Jan Kemp Pecoraro; Anton Frans Doubell; Philipus George Herbst Journal: Open Heart Date: 2020-11