Search

Background Using 2012 World Heart Federation criteria, standard portable echocardiography (STAND) reveals a high burden of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in resource-poor settings, but widespread screening is limited by cost and physician availability. Handheld echocardiography (HAND) may decrease costs, but World Heart Federation criteria are complicated for rapid field screening, particularly for nonphysician screeners. The aim of this study was to determine the best simplified screening strategy for RHD detection using HAND. Methods In this prospective study, STAND (GE Vivid q or i or Philips CX-50) was performed in five schools in Gulu, Uganda; a random subset plus all children with detectable mitral regurgitation or aortic insufficiency also underwent HAND (GE Vscan). Borderline or definite RHD cases were defined by 2012 World Heart Federation criteria on STAND images, by two experienced readers. HAND studies were reviewed by cardiologists blinded to STAND results. Single and combined HAND parameters were evaluated to determine the simplified screening strategy that maximized sensitivity and specificity for case detection. Results In 1,439 children (mean age, 10.8 ± 2.6 years; 47% male) with HAND and STAND studies, morphologic criteria and the presence of any mitral regurgitation by HAND had poor specificity. The presence of aortic insufficiency was specific but not sensitive. Combined criteria of mitral regurgitation jet length ≥ 1.5 cm or any aortic insufficiency best balanced sensitivity (73.3%) and specificity (82.4%), with excellent sensitivity for definite RHD (97.9%). With a prevalence of 4% and subsequent STAND screening of positive HAND studies, this would reduce STAND studies by 80% from a STAND-based screening strategy. Conclusions In resource-limited settings, HAND with simplified criteria can detect RHD with good sensitivity and specificity and decrease the need for standard echocardiography. Further study is needed to validate screening by local practitioners and long-term outcomes.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XX PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XX

Previous single-center studies have shown that telemedicine improves care in newborns with suspected heart disease. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that telemedicine would shorten time to diagnosis, prevent unnecessary transports, reduce length of stay, and decrease exposure to invasive treatments.Nine pediatric cardiology centers entered data prospectively on patients aged6 weeks, matched by gestational age, weight, and diagnosis. Subjects born at hospitals with and without access to telemedicine constituted the study group and control groups, respectively. Data from patients with mild or no heart disease were analyzed.Data were obtained for 337 matched pairs with mild or no heart disease. Transport to a tertiary care center (4% [n = 15] vs 10% [n = 32], P = .01), mean time to diagnosis (100 vs 147 min, P.001), mean length of stay (1.0 vs 26 days, P = .005) and length of intensive care unit stay (0.96 vs 2.5 days, P = .024) were significantly less in the telemedicine group. Telemedicine patients were significantly farther from tertiary care hospitals than control subjects. The use of inotropic support and indomethacin was significantly less in the telemedicine group. By multivariate analysis, telemedicine patients were less likely to be transported (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.83) and less likely to be placed on inotropic support (odds ratio, 0.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.28).Telemedicine shortened the time to diagnosis and significantly decreased the need for transport of infants with mild or no heart disease. The length of hospitalization and intensive care stay and use of indomethacin and inotropic support were less in telemedicine patients.