Statistics from Altmetric.com
Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is the late sequelae of inadequately treated group A streptococcal pharyngeal infections, leading to acute rheumatic fever, a multisystem immune response that often culminates in valvular damage and ultimately heart failure (HF).1 While advanced rheumatic valvular disease is ideally treated with interventional procedures (surgical or percutaneous), the reality is that access to these procedures is severely constrained in many RHD-endemic areas, limiting patients to medical management for symptom control.2
There are very limited data on the best practices for medical management of RHD, with most recommendations drawn from what is known from the general literature on HF, supraventricular arrhythmias and valvular heart disease. This is problematic because the population of patients with RHD is both younger and less likely to have secondary cardiac risk (such as coronary artery disease and hypertension) as compared with the general HF and valvular heart disease communities. In addition, cardiac involvement by RHD has some particularities that impact mortality, such as the frequent association with atrial fibrillation (AF) and flutter, which may influence therapeutic response and change outcomes.2
Newly, a large, multinational Global Rheumatic Heart Disease Registry (REMEDY) has provided the power to study therapeutics specifically in patients with RHD. The registry contains data on over 3300 patients with RHD, the majority living in low-income and middle-income countries, and half (51%) with advanced valvular heart disease at enrolment. While the data are exclusively observational—no therapeutics were guided by or changed by registry participation—REMEDY provides some of the first data on therapeutic practices and response among a large RHD-affected population.3
In Heart, we get the chance to review the first therapeutics paper to emerge from the REMEDY study; the use and effectiveness of digoxin.3 While digoxin (digitalis) is one of the oldest known cardiovascular drugs, its contemporary risk:benefit ratio …
Contributors BRN and AZB participated in literature review, analysis of the original manuscript, drafting and reviewing the final version of the editorial.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Not required.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement The data analytic methods and study materials will be made available to other researchers for purposes of reproducing the results or replicating the procedure, from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.