Abstract
In the 21st century, rheumatic fever (RF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) are neglected diseases of marginalized communities. Globally, RHD remains the most-common cardiovascular disease in young people aged <25 years. Although RF and RHD have been almost eradicated in areas with established economies, migration from low-income to high-income settings might be responsible for a new burden of RHD in high-income countries. The World Heart Federation (WHF) and its Working Group on RF and RHD unites global experts, combines their experience and enthusiasm, and provides a platform for RHD control. This paper is a declaration of the WHF institutional strategic goal—a 25% reduction in premature deaths from RF and RHD among individuals aged <25 years by the year 2025. The position statement affirms WHF commitments to five key strategic targets: comprehensive register-based control programmes, global access to benzathine penicillin G, identification and development of public figures as 'RHD champions', expansion of RHD training hubs, and support for vaccine development. In this paper, we also review existing barriers to RF and RHD control and identify the actions required to change the trajectory of control for these diseases. This approach provides the foundation for governments, civil society, patient advocates, clinicians, researchers, and funding agencies to develop partnerships and unify global efforts to control RF and RHD. The WHF plans to expand this position statement to an operational plan that will be founded on science, research, and quantifiable progress indicators to impact positively on the millions of people who are affected by RHD and its long-term sequelae.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Rheumatic fever (RF) is an autoimmune disease that follows a group A β-haemolytic streptococcal (GAS) infection of the throat (streptococcal pharyngitis).1 Streptococcal skin infection has also been implicated in the disease process.2,3 After recovery from the initial episode of RF, 60–65% of patients develop valvular heart disease.4,5 RF recurrences can lead to progressive valve damage (rheumatic heart disease; RHD), which in turn can cause atrial fibrillation and heart failure. As the disease progresses, lifesaving cardiac surgery often becomes necessary, and patients who do not have access to such treatment often die prematurely from RHD and its complications;6,7 in some studies the mean age of death was <25 years.7,8,9
In the mid-20th century, economic and sociopolitical change coincided with a surge of activity in research and control of RF and RHD, which resulted in the virtual elimination of RF in high-income regions of North America and Europe by the 1980s.10,11 A substantial proportion of this early work can be credited to the AHA and the WHO. However, the human, social, and economic costs of RF and RHD continue to burden many low-income and middle-income countries, and some indigenous populations of higher-income countries.6 Anecdotal reports suggest that demographic shifts over the past 10 years, with immigration from low-income countries, where RF and RHD are endemic, to high-income countries, have resulted in a rise in RHD prevalence in some regions where the disease was previously thought to have been eliminated.
The conservative estimate of the global burden of RHD in 2005 was 15.6–19.6 million existing cases, and an approximate global incidence of 282,000 new cases per year.6 Although questions remain about the importance of subclinical RHD—the rate of progression to clinical RHD and whether early treatment with secondary prophylaxis is justified to improve patient outcomes—emerging echocardiographic data suggest that the true prevalence of RHD might be several-fold higher than the 2005 global estimate.12,13,14,15,16,17,18 An estimated 233,000–468,164 individuals die from RHD each year, and hundreds of thousands of people are disabled by this disease and its long-term complications, which include heart failure, atrial fibrillation, stroke, infective endocarditis, and pregnancy-related complications.6 In the late 1990s, RHD was the most-common cardiovascular disease among individuals aged <25 years worldwide.19 Despite the paucity of epidemiological data from countries where RF and RHD are endemic, the 2010 Global Burden of Disease study demonstrated that RHD remains one of the leading cardiovascular causes of disability-adjusted life years lost in those aged <25 years.20 Expanded statistics on RF and RHD from the 2010 Global Burden of Disease study are due for publication in 2013.
The WHO Expert Report on RHD identifies that the prevention of RF and RHD can be undertaken at a number of levels.21 'Primordial prevention' refers to the improvement of environmental, social, and economic conditions of populations at risk of RF and RHD.22 In the absence of an effective vaccine, 'primary prevention' refers to treatment of acute streptococcal pharyngitis with antibiotics to reduce the incidence of RF. 'Secondary prevention' is the use of antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce the recurrence of RF in people with a history of RF or RHD21,22,23,24 and, therefore, limit disease progression and allow disease resolution.25,26,27 Finally, 'tertiary prevention' refers to medical and surgical treatment of the complications of RF and RHD.21,22
Role of the WHF in RF and RHD control
The World Heart Federation (WHF) is a collaboration between heart foundations and medical societies worldwide,28 and is recognized by the WHO as its leading nongovernmental organization partner in cardiovascular disease prevention.28 The WHF focuses on three strategic priorities to achieve its goals: global leadership and advocacy, risk factors, and treatment and care. In turn, three 'building blocks' provide tactics for these priorities: building evidence, building capacity, and building support. The WHF generates revenue from organizational memberships, scientific meetings, corporate partnerships, and donations.
The collaboration between the WHF and other international bodies is exemplified by 'The Global Programme on RF and RHD', which was jointly administered by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the WHO, and the International Society and Federation of Cardiology (the predecessor to WHF) from 1996 to 2001. After the programme was disbanded in 2001 owing to competing global health priorities,29,30 the WHF and other international organizations continued their activities for the control of RF and RHD. In July 2011, the WHF Working Group on RF and RHD was formally established to address the strategic goal of minimizing RHD burden and eliminating RF (Box 1).31 The Working Group on RF and RHD is comprised of experts from regions where RHD is endemic and global partners.
Opportunities for RF and RHD control
In the 20th century, RF prevention by treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis and control of RHD using antibiotic prophylaxis became possible.23,32,33 The challenge that remains is how best to apply this knowledge to low-income and middle-income countries where RF and RHD are still endemic. In such nations, estimates of disease burden are often inadequate or inaccurate, primary health care is not universally available, and disease control or elimination is not on government agendas. We are, however, witnessing a new surge of research and advocacy in low-income and middle-income countries.34 The WHF Working Group on RF and RHD now has the opportunity to foster a strategic approach to minimizing the burden of RHD and eliminating RF worldwide.
Aims and development of position paper
The primary aim of this position paper is to serve as a guide on how to achieve the objective of controlling RHD and eliminating RF in our generation. The paper also includes descriptions of existing barriers that limit disease control efforts and a discussion of the actions required to change the trajectory of RF and RHD control. This paper will provide a foundation for a WHF operational plan to achieve specific targets, over a set period of time, for control of RF and RHD (Box 2). Like other organizations, the WHF intends to make the activities and strategic targets of the organization widely accessible and open to scrutiny. This position paper includes an outline of priorities for policy makers, clinicians, researchers, and donors, and aims to engender a collaborative approach.
In April 2012 at the World Congress of Cardiology in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, the WHF Working Group on RF and RHD met to develop a position statement on RHD control to pave the way for an operational plan. Targets for disease control were developed in consultation with attendees from 20 countries affected by RF and RHD. The WHF Working Group aligned itself with the 65th United Nations General Assembly resolution (A/RES/66/2),35 and subsequently adopted the voluntary targets and language of the WHO 65th World Health Assembly, which include a reduction in premature deaths from noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) by 25% by the year 2025.36
Barriers to the control of RF and RHD
Neglect of RF and RHD
RF and RHD cause disproportionate burdens of disease between populations within nations and between different countries, affecting the most-vulnerable communities. Yet these diseases have largely been eliminated in high-resource settings.37,38 Therefore, in many respects, RF and RHD meet the WHO requirements of 'common features of neglected tropical diseases'.39,40 Neglect is manifested in the relative lack of engagement in disease control by governments, civil society, patient advocates, and funding agencies (Box 3).30,41 The interest in controlling RF and RHD fluctuated during the 20th century, and activities declined after the dissolution of The Global Programme on RF and RHD in 2001. RHD-related academic publications between 1996 and 2006 were 66% fewer than between 1966 and 1976.42
Although RHD is the most-common cardiovascular disease among young people (age <25 years) worldwide,19 just 0.1% of global health research funding for neglected diseases was targeted towards RF between 2007 and 2010, which equated to US$1,736,877 in 2010.43 This figure represents a 42.3% decrease compared with 2009.43 The G-Finder report on research and development for neglected diseases identified only four organizations that invested in RF and RHD research in 2010.43 The US NIH and Australian National Health and Medical Research Committee have been the only consistent funders of RF research and development over the past 4 years. Philanthropic funding is disproportionately low compared with that for other neglected diseases. Public health research institutes provided 91.4% of total funding for RHD research, with philanthropic organizations contributing only 8.6%.43 Industry provided negligible funding in 2010, after investing US$1.4 million in 2009.43 This decrease in funding was attributed to the effect of the global financial crisis, the impact of which on neglected disease research and development first became evident in 2010.43
Control of RF and RHD will require a substantial increase in funding. Increasingly, access to funding is predicated on evidence of affordable and cost-effective interventions.44,45 Treatment of pharyngitis with antibiotics for the primary prevention of RF has been deemed to be cost-effective by some investigators in South Africa and India.32,46,47 Historical analysis has shown that secondary prevention with benzathine penicillin G (BPG) is the most cost-effective measure for RHD control (Table 1).48 However, a need exists for contemporary cost-effectiveness analyses of primary and secondary prevention in multiple settings to galvanize support for disease control. Investigating the affordability of specific components of a comprehensive programme is urgent. The cost-effectiveness of large-scale echocardiographic screening and primary prevention programmes should be among the highest priorities.17,29 Building a strong economic case for disease control is central to securing government and nongovernmental funds. Programme success will be dependent on sustained core government funding and political will.
Paucity of data and scientific knowledge
Epidemiology
To achieve the global targets set in the 65th World Health Assembly36 by 2025, the burden of cardiovascular disease (particularly RHD) must be reduced. Global prioritizing of NCDs provides an unprecedented opportunity for the international RHD community to align itself with these WHO targets. Descriptive and prognostic epidemiological data outlining disease prevalence, mortality, and morbidity are critical for developing realistic targets and key performance indicators towards disease control (Box 4). The current global figure for RHD mortality is speculative and likely to be a gross underestimate.6 Calculations assumed mortality of 1.5% of all patients with RHD per year, extrapolated from data from the USA and Japan.6 In resource-poor settings, where RHD is most prevalent, mortality has been estimated to be between 3.0% and 12.5% per year.7–9 Updated estimates of RHD prevalence and RHD-related mortality and morbidity are expected in the next 12 months from the Global Burden of Disease, Injury and Risk Factors study49 and from the Global Rheumatic Heart Disease Registry.50 Contemporary mortality data from resource-poor settings, however, remain scarce. Nevertheless, such data are vital to achievement of the overarching goal of reducing mortality from RF and RHD by 25% and for the development of quantifiable progress indicators.
Since the 2005 global disease estimate, a small number of countries have conducted population-based echocardiographic screening surveys for RHD allowing more-comprehensive estimates of disease burden.17 However, most countries have no epidemiological data to inform the development of national RHD programmes. The development of standardized guidelines on how to perform and conduct systematic echocardiographic screening to estimate disease prevalence would facilitate such epidemiological data collection. Currently, no internationally endorsed definition of a country where RHD is endemic exists. Classification of countries (or regions) as 'nonendemic', 'endemic', or 'hyperendemic' by the WHF would allow for objective and tangible target setting, and co-ordination of global resources and advocacy activities.
Research priorities
Elimination (incidence reduced to below a given threshold) or total eradication (0 deaths per 100,000 of the population per year) of RF and RHD have been cited as the ultimate goals of control activities for these diseases. However, this aspiration has not been clearly defined, nor its feasibility robustly investigated despite frequent references to 'virtual elimination'.10,51,52 Although total eradication of RF is a noble goal, this target has only ever been achieved for one human disease—smallpox.53 For other diseases, such as malaria, elimination has been the target.54 Clearly elucidating the 'end game' of RF and RHD control will help to define development of research priorities in the field (Box 4).
Global research priorities for RF and RHD were identified in 2011 by Carapetis and Zühlke.29 First, translating existing knowledge into practical RHD control. Second, early identification of RHD so that preventative measures have an increased chance of success. Third, enhancing our understanding of RF and RHD pathogenesis with a view to improving diagnosis and treatment. Fourth, finding effective approaches to primary prevention of RF and RHD.29 Addressing these challenges is fundamental to the success of programmes for the control of RF and RHD and for resource allocation. In addition, existing and emerging programmes must be robustly monitored and continuously evaluated to inform best practice. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of disease control programmes will allow for meaningful dissemination of data, and for implementation strategies to be adapted as required.
Research, implementation of trials of components of RHD control programmes, capacity building to increase quantity and quality of community health workers, specialized training, and sharing of information should be coordinated from regional hubs with a dual focus on research and clinical service delivery. This approach would facilitate knowledge exchange between comparable geographical settings, peer-review of activities, and professional collegiality. Facilitation, coordination and communication between regional hubs within the domain of the WHF should be administered by the WHF and its members.
Vaccines
A GAS vaccine is required for effective population-level primary prevention of RF (Box 4).55 GAS vaccine development and human testing has been underway for nearly a century with fluctuating enthusiasm.55 Involvement of the pharmaceutical industry in the development process has been sporadic and transient. Although a number of major companies retain an interest in GAS vaccine development, few have active internal programmes. The global interest in vaccine development has been renewed over the past decade, with a number of publically funded agencies engaged in the field. Through the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the NIH has provided support and strategic grants that have aided the development of the two main vaccine candidates: multivalent M protein and J8-DT. To reach the goal of successful global licensure of an effective GAS vaccine, a number of elements are necessary: advocacy for vaccine development, involvement of pharmaceutical companies, completion of a plan for vaccine development, and funding. The position statement by the Decade of Vaccine Collaboration on this subject is due for publication in 2013.56
Access to health care
A number of consensus-based and evidence-based guidelines exist on how best to prevent, diagnose, and treat RF and RHD.21,22,57,58,59,60 However, these efforts have not translated into improved medical and surgical care worldwide. Barriers to optimal primary and secondary prevention, and medical and surgical care (tertiary prevention), are outlined below (Box 5).
Primary prevention
In the absence of an effective GAS vaccine, definitive control of RF and RHD must incorporate alternative measures of primary prevention of RF. Primary prevention, by treatment of GAS pharyngitis with antibiotics, is effective in preventing RF. However, the cost-effectiveness of sore throat screening programmes and how they should be incorporated into an overall control strategy for RF and RHD requires further clinical and economic evaluation.29,61 In addition, the role of skin infections in the pathogenesis of RF requires further investigation.3,29 In some tropical regions with a high incidence of RF, GAS pyoderma is endemic yet rates of GAS pharyngeal carriage and symptomatic pharyngitis are low.2,3,5,62 Should GAS skin infection be implicated in RF pathogenesis, a new approach to primary prevention would potentially be opened.
Secondary prevention
Intramuscular injection of BPG every 3–4 weeks is required to prevent recurrence of RF and development or progression of RHD.21,23,61,63 BPG is on the WHO list of essential medicines, but the global supply and quality of this drug has been inconsistent.64,65,66,67,68 The manufacturing process for the powdered form of BPG, effective dose, and quality parameters are largely undocumented, and the drug is produced by an unknown number of generic manufacturers. A branded, premixed liquid formulation of BPG (Bicillin®, King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bristol, TN, USA) is manufactured by Pfizer and is the predominantly used formulation in high-resource settings. The product is expensive and requires a cold supply chain, limiting feasibility in countries where RF and RHD are endemic. Developing ways to monitor quality of BPG, and working with manufacturers to guarantee supply of the powdered form of the drug is a high priority.29 In addition to inconsistent quality and supply of BPG, low patient compliance with 3–4 weekly BPG injections limits the efficacy of secondary prophylaxis programmes. The determinants of BPG compliance are incompletely understood;29 however, pain related to injections does not seem to be the predominant factor.69 Access to health care and providing culturally appropriate health education to patients and their families might be the most important factors.69 Implantable or nanocarrier-based delivery of BPG would be a potential alternative to monthly injection, but innovation has been limited in this field.29,70 Approaches to optimize compliance with secondary prophylaxis remain important research questions. For example, a community randomized trial in the Aboriginal population in Australia is currently being conducted to evaluate a health service intervention aimed at improving adherence rates to secondary prophylaxis.71
Tertiary prevention: medical care
Optimal medical care is critical to minimize morbidity and mortality related to RHD. Sequelae of RHD include heart failure, atrial fibrillation, stroke, infective endocarditis, and pregnancy-related complications. The availability of WHO-listed essential cardiac medications, including diuretics, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, and β-blockers, has been identified as a modifiable barrier to effective clinical care in many regions where RHD is endemic.68 Similarly, access to anticoagulant drugs that are required in the setting of arrhythmias and after mechanical valve replacement is often limited. Optimal medical care also requires access to basic diagnostic modalities, including electrocardiographic and echocardiographic monitoring, as well as regular biochemical, microbiological, and anticoagulant blood tests. Of concern, warfarin is the only oral anticoagulant licensed for use in the setting of valvular heart disease and requires regular therapeutic monitoring. Point-of-care portable monitoring of anticoagulant status is feasible and has been shown to improve clinical care.72 However, the majority of low-income countries, many with geographically dispersed populations, rely on centralized laboratories and are stymied by transport, procurement, and communication issues. The result is often suboptimal therapeutic monitoring of anticoagulation with catastrophic outcomes, particularly embolic and haemorrhagic stroke.73
Challenges in the medical care of patients with RHD are epitomized by poor maternal, foetal, and neonatal outcomes in the perinatal period.74 Late diagnosis of RHD, suboptimal care, and insufficient anticoagulation have been highlighted as key contributing factors.75 Antenatal screening for RHD and timely referral to tertiary care medical facilities could improve outcomes and warrants investigation.76
Tertiary prevention: surgical care
The majority of individuals with RHD do not have access to expensive lifesaving cardiac surgery, as few low-income countries where RHD is endemic have cardiosurgical facilities.77 For example, access to open heart surgery in Africa is poor; 18 such procedures per million of the population are performed in Africa compared with 1,222 per million in the USA.14,77 Travelling abroad for cardiac surgery is expensive and often unsustainable on a national level.78 Increasingly, charities provide funding for individuals from low-income countries to have cardiac surgery abroad, or for overseas surgical teams to visit developing countries. These services are not always accompanied by adequate long-term post-operative care, and rarely take place in countries with coordinated secondary prophylaxis programmes.29 Embedding surgical services within sustainable health-care systems should be a priority.
Over the past decade, increasing numbers of cardiosurgical centres, predominantly in high-income countries, have developed expertise in valve repair to avoid the need for long-term anticoagulation and therapeutic monitoring. However, in resource-poor settings, where RF and RHD are most prevalent, access to valve repair is minimal and complications related to mechanical valves are unacceptably high.79,80 For example, some organizations are able to offer only mechanical valve replacement, and not valve repair, to individuals with RHD from low-income environments, presumably due to technical limitations of surgeons attending cardiosurgical missions.
Health education and training
With advances in community-based diagnostics and treatment modalities, such as portable echocardiography and anticoagulation monitoring, prevention and medical care for RF and RHD are now within reach even in the most-marginalized communities.12,13,15,18,81 However, the global shortage of skilled community health workers, nurses, and doctors limits the extent to which established cost-effective methods of RHD control can be delivered (Box 6). This issue is not unique to RF and RHD; an estimated 1 million community health workers are needed in Africa alone to meet the health-related targets of the Millennium Developmental Goals.82
Successful national control programmes for RF and RHD have invested heavily in the education of clinicians and in community awareness programmes to promote the importance of primary and secondary prevention.83 WHF workshops and scientific meetings are avenues for clinical training and education, but only a privileged few from resource-poor regions have the opportunity to attend such meetings, which are often held in well-resourced settings. The establishment of regional hubs for RF and RHD would expand the scope and volume of long-term training and minimize the cost and time required for centralized international meetings.84
The WHF RHDnet website31 hosts up-to-date clinical guidelines and educational materials in a number of languages. Improved access to the Internet in developing countries offers an opportunity for education and training to be delivered from a distance. Cardiologists, sonographers, echocardiographers, and nurses are scarce in resource-poor settings.14 To make progress, community health-workers must be recruited, trained, and empowered to take a leading role in the control of RF and RHD.
Health systems
Successful prevention of RF and control of RHD requires education, treatment of streptococcal infection (primary prevention), register-based secondary prevention interventions, and the medical and surgical treatment of patients with complications of RHD (Box 7).51,82,85,86 The successful examples of such comprehensive programmes highlight the need to strengthen primary health care to combat the disease.52,83 Despite the recommendations of the WHO and the WHF, only a handful of regions within countries such as Australia, Brazil, India, New Zealand, and Tonga have adopted comprehensive register-based control programmes, which are universally accepted to be the most cost-effective method of RF and RHD control.21 Key components of such programmes are outlined in Box 8.
Integration of RF and RHD control programmes into wider health systems is a high priority to avoid the development of 'unsustainable monolithic programmes'.21,29 This risk of isolated, disease-specific programmes contributing to inefficient or narrow-spectrum care has been identified over a number of decades.21,87 Some degree of centralization is necessary for effective delivery of services, given that RHD occurs in mobile and vulnerable populations with the need for long-term follow up and timely delivery of secondary prophylaxis. Centralized registries also enable descriptive and prognostic epidemiological data to be collected, and enable research to be conducted to improve our understanding of the disease.88 However, this approach must be combined with improved delivery of primary health care.89
Mapping the intersections between initiatives for RF and RHD control could identify synergies for programmatic integration and complementary policy agendas. For example, collaboration with other programmes that are also dependent on BPG, such as the control of syphilis and yaws, both of which are caused by the bacterium Treponema, could ensure a secure supply of high-quality BPG. Partnering with other health-care specialties, such as obstetrics and emergency medicine, that utilize ultrasonography could allow widespread incorporation of portable ultrasonography equipment that is economically justifiable even in resource-poor settings. At a local level, operational partnerships could enhance service delivery, for example, combining RHD screening with antenatal visits in areas where the disease is endemic.76 Strengthening partnerships with established groups, such as those focused on maternal and child health, NCDs, and neglected tropical diseases, could support sustainable integration of control programmes for RF and RHD into the wider health system and advance the advocacy agenda on a global scale.
Conclusions
This paper is a declaration of commitment from the WHF Working Group on RF and RHD to fight these diseases, and will form the platform for a detailed operational plan to address the barriers to RF and RHD control. The operational plan will be founded on science, research, and quantifiable progress indicators to impact positively on millions of individuals with RHD and its long-term sequelae. Actions must be prioritized, acknowledging capacity and resource limitations. Priorities include clearly identifying regions where RF and RHD are endemic, securing supplies of high-quality BPG, and developing training hubs to build local capacity. Clinicians, researchers, governments, civil societies, patient advocates, and funding agencies will need to unite to achieve success.
References
Guilherme, L., Kalil, J. & Cunningham, M. Molecular mimicry in the autoimmune pathogenesis of rheumatic heart disease. Autoimmunity 39, 31–39 (2006).
Bessen, D. E. et al. Contrasting molecular epidemiology of group A streptococci causing tropical and nontropical infections of the skin and throat. J. Infect. Dis. 182, 1109–1116 (2000).
McDonald, M. I. et al. Low rates of streptococcal pharyngitis and high rates of pyoderma in Australian aboriginal communities where acute rheumatic fever is hyperendemic. Clin. Infect. Dis. 43, 683–689 (2006).
Bland, E. F. & Jones, T. D. Rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease; a twenty year report on 1,000 patients followed since childhood. Circulation 4, 836–843 (1951).
Carapetis, J. R., Currie, B. J. & Mathews, J. D. Cumulative incidence of rheumatic fever in an endemic region: a guide to the susceptibility of the population? Epidemiol. Infect. 124, 239–244 (2000).
Carapetis, J. R., Steer, A. C., Mulholland, E. K. & Weber, M. The global burden of group A streptococcal diseases. Lancet Infect. Dis. 5, 685–694 (2005).
Gunther, G., Asmera, J. & Parry, E. Death from rheumatic heart disease in rural Ethiopia. Lancet 367, 391 (2006).
Jaiyesimi, F. & Antia, A. U. Childhood rheumatic heart disease in Nigeria. Trop. Geogr. Med. 33, 8–13 (1981).
Kumar, R., Raizada, A., Aggarwal, A. K. & Ganguly, N. K. A community-based rheumatic fever/rheumatic heart disease cohort: twelve-year experience. Indian Heart J. 54, 54–58 (2002).
Gordis, L. The virtual disappearance of rheumatic fever in the United States: lessons in the rise and fall of disease. T. Duckett Jones memorial lecture. Circulation 72, 1155–1162 (1985).
Kaplan, E. L. T. Duckett Jones Memorial Lecture. Global assessment of rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease at the close of the century. Influences and dynamics of populations and pathogens: a failure to realize prevention? Circulation 88, 1964–1972 (1993).
Marijon, E. et al. Prevalence of rheumatic heart disease detected by echocardiographic screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 470–476 (2007).
Beaton, A. et al. Echocardiography screening for rheumatic heart disease in Ugandan schoolchildren. Circulation 125, 3127–3132 (2012).
Sliwa, K. & Zilla, P. Rheumatic heart disease: the tip of the iceberg. Circulation 125, 3060–3062 (2012).
Paar, J. A. et al. Prevalence of rheumatic heart disease in children and young adults in Nicaragua. Am. J. Cardiol. 105, 1809–1814 (2010).
Bhaya, M., Panwar, S., Beniwal, R. & Panwar, R. B. High prevalence of rheumatic heart disease detected by echocardiography in school children. Echocardiography 27, 448–453 (2010).
Roberts, K., Colquhoun, S., Steer, A., Remenyi, B. & Carapetis, J. Screening for rheumatic heart disease: current approaches and controversies. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 10, 49–58 (2012).
Webb, R. H. et al. Optimising echocardiographic screening for rheumatic heart disease in New Zealand: not all valve disease is rheumatic. Cardiol. Young 21, 436–443 (2011).
Murray, C. J. & Lopez, A. D. Global Health Statistics (Harvard University Press, 1996).
Lozano, R. et al. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 380, 2095–2128 (2012).
WHO. Rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease. Report of a WHO expert consultation. Geneva, 29 October – 1 November 2001. WHO Technical Report Series 923. [online], (2004).
RHDAustralia. Australian guideline for prevention, diagnosis and management of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease (2nd edition) [online], (2012).
Manyemba, J. & Mayosi, B. M. Intramuscular penicillin is more effective than oral penicillin in secondary prevention of rheumatic fever—a systematic review. S. Afr. Med. J. 93, 212–218 (2003).
Feinstein, A. R. et al. Prophylaxis of recurrent rheumatic fever. Therapeutic-continuous oral penicillin vs monthly injections. JAMA 206, 565–568 (1968).
Kassem, A. S., el-Walili, T. M., Zaher, S. R. & Ayman, M. Reversibility of mitral regurgitation following rheumatic fever: clinical profile and echocardiographic evaluation. Indian J. Pediatr. 62, 717–723 (1995).
Chagani, H. S. & Aziz, K. Clinical profile of acute rheumatic fever in Pakistan. Cardiol. Young 13, 28–35 (2003).
Tompkins, D. G., Boxerbaum, B. & Liebman, J. Long-term prognosis of rheumatic fever patients receiving regular intramuscular benzathine penicillin. Circulation 45, 543–551 (1972).
World Heart Federation. History [online], (2012).
Carapetis, J. R. & Zühlke, L. Global research priorities in rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease. Ann. Pediatr. Cardiol. 4, 4–12 (2011).
Marijon, E., Mirabel, M., Celemajer, D. S. & Jouven, X. Rheumatic heart disease. Lancet 379, 953–964 (2012).
World Heart Federation. RHDnet. A global resource for rheumatic heart disease. For health professionals and communities [online], (2011).
Robertson, K. A., Volmink, J. A. & Mayosi, B. M. Antibiotics for the primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever: a meta-analysis. BMC Cardiovasc. Disord. 5, 11 (2005).
Stollerman, G. H. & Rusoff, J. H. Prophylaxis against group a streptococcal infections in rheumatic fever patients; use of new repository penicillin preparation. JAMA 150, 1571–1575 (1952).
Mayosi, B. et al. The Drakensberg declaration on the control of rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in Africa. S. Afr. Med. J. 96, 246 (2006).
United Nations General Assembly. Political Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Prevention and Control of Non-communicable Diseases (A/RES/66/2) [online], (2012).
WHO. Sixty-fifth World Health Assembly: daily notes on proceedings. [online], (2012).
Seckeler, M. D. & Hoke, T. R. The worldwide epidemiology of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease. Clin. Epidemiol. 3, 67–84 (2011).
Massell, B. F., Chute, C. G., Walker, A. M. & Kurland, G. S. Pencillin and the marked decrease in mortality and morbidity from rheumatic fever in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 318, 280–286 (1988).
Broadbent, A. Defining neglected disease. BioSocieties 6, 51–70 (2011).
WHO. First WHO report on neglected tropical diseases. Working to overcome the global impact of neglected tropical diseases [online], (2010).
Watkins, D. A., Zuhlke, L. J., Engel, M. E. & Mayosi, B. M. Rheumatic fever: neglected again. Science 324, 37 (2009).
Carapetis, J. R. Rheumatic heart disease in developing countries. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 439–441 (2007).
Moran, M. et al. G-Finder: Global Funding of Innovation for Neglected Diseases. Neglected disease research and development: is innovation under threat? Policy Cures [online], (2011).
Levine, R. Unhealthy competition. Perspectives in Health 11, 31–32 (2007).
Shiffman, J. Donor funding priorities for communicable disease control in the developing world. Health Policy Plan. 21, 411–420 (2006).
Soudarssanane, M. B. et al. Rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease: primary prevention is the cost effective option. Indian J. Pediatr. 74, 567–570 (2007).
Irlam, J., Mayosi, B., Engel, M. & Gaziano, T. Primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease with penicillin in South African children with pharyngitis: a cost-effectiveness analysis [abstract]. Circulation 126, A13130 (2012).
Michaud, C., Rammohan, R. & Narula, J. in Rheumatic Fever (eds Narula, J., Virmani, R., Reddy, K. & Tandon, R.) 485–497 (American Registry of Pathology, 1990).
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2010 [online], (2012).
Karthikeyan, G. et al. Rationale and design of a global rheumatic heart disease registry: the remedy study. Am. Heart J. 163, 535–540 (2012).
Mayosi, B. M. A proposal for the eradication of rheumatic fever in our lifetime. S. Afr. Med. J. 96, 229–230 (2006).
Arguedas, A. & Mohs, E. Prevention of rheumatic fever in Costa Rica. J. Pediatr. 121, 569–572 (1992).
WHO. The global eradication of smallpox: final report of the Global Commission for the Certification of Smallpox Eradication. Geneva, December 1979 [online], (1980).
Cohen, J. M., Moonen, B., Snow, R. W. & Smith, D. L. How absolute is zero? An evaluation of historical and current definitions of malaria elimination. Malar. J. 9, 213 (2010).
Pandey, M., Batzloff, M. R. & Good, M. F. Vaccination against rheumatic heart disease: a review of current research strategies and challenges. Curr. Infect. Dis. Rep. 14, 381–390 (2012).
Dale, J. et al. Group A streptococcal vaccines: paving a path for accelerated development. Vaccine (in press).
KwaZulu-Natal Department of Health. National guidelines on the primary prevention and prophylaxis of rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease for health professionals at primary level [online], (1997).
Dajani, A. et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis of rheumatic fever. Jones Criteria, 1992 update. Special Writing Group of the Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis and Kawasaki Disease of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young of the American Heart Association. JAMA 268, 2069–2073 (1992).
The Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand. New Zealand Guidelines for rheumatic fever 1. Diagnosis, management and secondary prevention [online], (2006).
Remenyi, B. et al. World Heart Federation criteria for echocardiographic diagnosis of rheumatic heart disease—an evidence-based guideline. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 9, 297–309 (2012).
Lennon, D., Kerdemelidis, M. & Arroll, B. Meta-analysis of trials of streptococcal throat treatment programs to prevent rheumatic fever. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 28, e259–e264 (2009).
Pruksakorn, S. et al. Epidemiological analysis of non-M-typeable group A Streptococcus isolates from a Thai population in northern Thailand. J. Clin. Microbiol. 38, 1250–1254 (2000).
Spinetto, H., Lennon, D. & Horsburgh, M. Rheumatic fever recurrence prevention: a nurse-led programme of 28-day penicillin in an area of high endemnicity. J. Paediatr. Child Health 47, 228–234 (2011).
Laing, R., Waning, B., Gray, A., Ford, N. & 't Hoen, E. 25 years of the WHO essential medicines lists: progress and challenges. Lancet 361, 1723–1729 (2003).
Broderick, M. P. et al. Serum penicillin G levels are lower than expected in adults within two weeks of administration of 1.2 million units. PLoS ONE 6, e25308 (2011).
Kaplan, E. L. Benzathine penicillin G: a documentably important antibiotic in need of a tune-up? Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 31, 726–728 (2012).
Kaplan, E. L. et al. Pharmacokinetics of benzathine penicillin G: serum levels during the 28 days after intramuscular injection of 1,200,000 units. J. Pediatr. 115, 146–150 (1989).
WHO. The Selection and Use of Essential Medicines. Report of the WHO expert committee 2011 (including the 17thWHO Model List of Essential Medicine, and the 3rdWHO Model List of Essential Medicines for Children) (WHO, 2011).
Gasse, B. et al. Determinants of poor adherence to secondary antibiotic prophylaxis for rheumatic fever recurrence on Lifou, New Caledonia: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Public Health 13, 131 (2013).
De Holanda, E. et al. Trends in rheumatic fever: clinical aspects and perspectives in prophylactic treatments. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 9, 1099–1110 (2012).
Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Improving delivery of secondary prophylaxis for rheumatic heart disease. Trial ID: ACTRN12613000223730 [online], (2012).
Soper, J., Chan, G. T., Skinner, J. R., Spinetto, H. D. & Gentles, T. L. Management of oral anticoagulation in a population of children with cardiac disease using a computerised system to support decision-making. Cardiol. Young 16, 256–260 (2006).
Pastakia, S. D. et al. Implementation of a pharmacist managed anticoagulation clinic in Eldoret, Kenya. Southern Med. Review 3, 20–23 (2010).
Diao, M. et al. Pregnancy in women with heart disease in sub-Saharan Africa. Arch. Cardiovasc. Dis. 104, 370–374 (2011).
Nqayana, T., Moodley, J. & Naidoo, D. P. Cardiac disease in pregnancy. Cardiovasc. J. Afr. 19, 145–151 (2008).
Otto, H., Saether, S. G., Banteyrga, L., Haugen, B. O. & Skjaerpe, T. High prevalence of subclinical heart disease in pregnant women in a developing country: an echocardiographic study. Echocardiography 28, 1049–1053 (2011).
Pezzella, A. T. Global aspects of cardiothoracic surgery with focus on developing countries. Asian Cardiovasc. Thorac. Ann. 18, 299–310 (2010).
Viali, S., Saena, P. & Futi, V. Rheumatic fever programme in Samoa. N. Z. Med. J. 124, 26–35 (2011).
Shuhaiber, J. & Anderson, R. J. Meta-analysis of clinical outcomes following surgical mitral valve repair or replacement. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 31, 267–275 (2007).
Gometza, B., al-Halees, Z., Shahid, M., Hatle, L. K. & Duran, C. M. Surgery for rheumatic mitral regurgitation in patients below twenty years of age. An analysis of failures. J. Heart Valve Dis. 5, 294–301 (1996).
Steer, A. C. et al. High prevalence of rheumatic heart disease by clinical and echocardiographic screening among children in Fiji. J. Heart Valve Dis. 18, 327–335 (2009).
Conway, M. D., Gupta, S. & Khajavi, K. Addressing Africa's health workforce crisis. McKinsey Quarterly (November 2007).
Nordet, P., Lopez, R., Dueñas, A. & Luis, S. Prevention and control of rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease: the Cuban experience (1986-1996-2002). Cardiovasc. J. Afr. 19, 135–140 (2008).
Robertson, K. A., Volmink, J. A. & Mayosi, B. M. for the Writing Committee, 1stAll Africa Workshop on Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease. Towards a uniform plan for the control of rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in Africa—the Awareness Surveillance Advocacy Prevention (ASAP) Programme. S. Afr. Med. J. 96, 241–245 (2006).
Bach, J. F. et al. 10-year educational programme aimed at rheumatic fever in two French Caribbean islands. Lancet 347, 644–648 (1996).
Gordis, L. Effectiveness of comprehensive-care programs in preventing rheumatic fever. N. Engl. J. Med. 289, 331–335 (1973).
Strasser, T. et al. The community control of rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease: report of a WHO international cooperative project. Bull. World Health Organ. 59, 285–294 (1981).
Forrest, C. B., Bartek, R. J., Rubinstein, Y. & Groft, S. C. The case for a global rare-diseases registry. Lancet 377, 1057–1059 (2011).
Atun, R., Bennett, S. & Duran, A. Policy brief. When do vertical (stand-alone) programmes have a place in health systems? WHO on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies [online], (2008).
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge and thank the other members of the World Heart Federation Working Group on Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease (Azza Abdul-Fadl, Ann Bolger, Dayi Hu, Samuel Kingue, Diana Lennon, Alan Maisel, Ana Mocumbi, Regina Muller, Craig Sable, Anita Saxena, and Tomas Sanabria) for their critical review of the manuscript. We also thank the Working Group, World Heart Federation personnel (Alice Grainger-Gasser, Stephen Marko, Johanna Ralston, Sidney C. Smith Jr, and Kelly Worden) and experts in the field (Rohan Greenland, Lyn Roberts, Andrew Steer, and Liesl Zuhlke) for their input into the development of the position statement at the Strategic Planning Group meeting on 16 April 2012 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. We acknowledge the Medtronic Foundation for their support of the World Heart Federation Working Group on Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors researched data for the article, contributed to the discussion of content, and reviewed/edited the manuscript before submission. The paper was written by B. Remenyi and R. Wyber. The authors represent the World Heart Federation Working Group on Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease. The manuscript was prepared on behalf of Working Group members.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Remenyi, B., Carapetis, J., Wyber, R. et al. Position statement of the World Heart Federation on the prevention and control of rheumatic heart disease. Nat Rev Cardiol 10, 284–292 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2013.34
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2013.34
This article is cited by
-
The global burden and risk factors of cardiovascular diseases in adolescent and young adults, 1990–2019
BMC Public Health (2024)
-
Analysis and comparison of the trends in burden of rheumatic heart disease in China and worldwide from 1990 to 2019
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders (2023)
-
Sub-clinical rheumatic heart disease (RHD) detected by hand-held echocardiogram in children participating in a school-based RHD prevention program in Tanzania
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders (2023)
-
Global burden of rheumatic heart disease: trends from 1990 to 2019
Arthritis Research & Therapy (2022)
-
Rheumatic heart disease in The Gambia: clinical and valvular aspects at presentation and evolution under penicillin prophylaxis
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders (2021)