Journals / Turkish Journal of Pediatrics / 2020 / Cilt: 62 - Sayı: 3

New guidelines for diagnosis of rheumatic fever; do they apply to all populations?

Pages
411–423
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Our predictors showed a high sensitivity of 93%, a specificity of 62% and an overall prediction accuracy of 81.4%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background and objectives.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Clinical data of 891 Egyptian patients with rheumatic fever, aged 5-15 years in a highly specialized rheumatic fever clinic were reviewed retrospectively from March 2014 to March 2016.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Our predictors showed a high sensitivity of 93%, a specificity of 62% and an overall prediction accuracy of 81.4%.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Background and objectives. To evaluate the efficacy of recently updated Jones criteria for diagnosis of rheumatic fever in high incidence populations like Egypt. Methods. Clinical data of 891 Egyptian patients with rheumatic fever, aged 5-15 years in a highly specialized rheumatic fever clinic were reviewed retrospectively from March 2014 to March 2016. Discriminant analysis was used to detect the most effective predictors for diagnosis of rheumatic fever in our patients incorporating echocardiographic criteria. We compared our results to the most recent update by the American Heart Association. Results. The most effective predictors of rheumatic fever included arthritis, carditis, chorea, aortic regurgitation, grades of mitral regurgitation ≥10mm length and velocity ≥2.5 m/s, thick anterior mitral valve leaflets, elevated acute phase reactants, positive family history and prolonged PR interval. Our predictors showed a high sensitivity of 93%, a specificity of 62% and an overall prediction accuracy of 81.4%. Conclusion. We concluded that strict application of updated Jones criteria may lead to under diagnosis of rheumatic fever in highly endemic countries. We recommend further studies to examine the sensitivity of the most recent update of Jones criteria on other highly endemic populations.

🔖

Cite This Article

MARZOUK, P. A. A., HAMZA, H., MOSAAD, N., EMAM, S., FATTOUH, A. M., HAMİD, L. (2020). New guidelines for diagnosis of rheumatic fever; do they apply to all populations?. Turkish Journal of Pediatrics, Cilt: 62 - Sayı: 3, 411–423. https://ajindex.com/articles/411852

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Abdel-Moula AM, Sherif AA, Sallam SA, Mandil AM, Kassem AS, Zaher SR. Prevalence of rheumatic heart disease among school children in Alexandria, Egypt: a prospective epidemiological study. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 1998; 73: 233-254
  2. Carapetis JR. Rheumatic heart disease in developing countries. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 439-441
  3. Bryant PA, Robins-Browne R, Carapetis JR, Curtis N. Some of the people, some of the time: susceptibility to acute rheumatic fever. Circulation 2009; 119: 742- 753
  4. Jones TD. The diagnosis of rheumatic fever. JAMA 1944; 126: 481-484
  5. 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 1992; 268: 2069-2073
  6. Ferrieri P, for the Jones Criteria Working Group. Proceedings of the Jones Criteria Workshop. Circulation 2002; 106: 2521-2523
  7. WHO Study Group. Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease: Report of a WHO Expert Consultation; 20 October-1 November 2001, Geneva, Switzerland. Technical Report Series No
  8. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2004
  9. Carapetis J, Brown A, Walsh W, et al; National Heart Foundation of Australia (RF/RHD Guidelines Development Working Group) and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand. Diagnosis and management of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in Australian - An evidencebased review. 2006
  10. RHD Australia (ARF/RHD Writing Group), National Heart Foundation of Australia, Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand. The Australian Guideline for Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management of Acute Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease (2nd ed). Casuarina, Australia: RHD Australia; 2012
  11. Remenyi B, Wilson N, Steer A, et al. World Heart Federation criteria for echocardiographic diagnosis of rheumatic heart disease – an evidence – based guideline. Nat Rev Cardiol 2012; 9: 297-309
  12. Gewitz MH, Baltimore RS, Tani LY, et al; American Heart Association Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young. Revision of the Jones criteria for the diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever in the era of Doppler Echocardiography: a Scientific Statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2015; 131: 1806-1818
  13. Lancellotti P, Moura L, Picrard LA, et al; European Association of Ec