Handheld echocardiography for the screening and diagnosis of rheumatic heart disease: a systematic review to inform WHO guidelines

Abstract

Background: Early detection and diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease are key to preventing progression, and echocardiography has an important diagnostic role. Standard echocardiography might not be feasible in high-prevalence regions due to its high cost, complexity, and time requirement. Handheld echocardiography might be an easy-to-use, low-cost alternative, but its performance in screening for and diagnosing acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease needs further investigation.

Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Embase, MEDLINE, LILACS, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science up to Feb 9, 2024, for studies on the screening and diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease using handheld echocardiography (index test) or standard echocardiography or auscultation (reference tests) in high-prevalence areas. We included all studies with useable data in which the diagnostic performance of the index test was assessed against a reference test. Data on test accuracy in diagnosing rheumatic heart disease, acute rheumatic fever, or carditis with acute rheumatic fever (primary outcomes) were extracted from published articles or calculated, with authors contacted as necessary. Quality of evidence was appraised using GRADE and QUADAS-2 criteria. We summarised diagnostic accuracy statistics (including sensitivity and specificity) and estimated 95% CIs using a bivariate random-effects model (or univariate random-effects models for analyses including three or fewer studies). Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated from summary receiver operating characteristic curves. Heterogeneity was assessed by visual inspection of plots. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022344081).

Findings: Out of 4868 records we identified 11 studies, and two additional reports, comprising 15 578 unique participants. Pooled data showed that handheld echocardiography had high sensitivity (0·87 [95% CI 0·76-0·93]), specificity (0·98 [0·71-1·00]), and overall high accuracy (AUC 0·94 [0·84-1·00]) for diagnosing rheumatic heart disease when compared with standard echocardiography (two studies; moderate certainty of evidence), with better performance for diagnosing definite compared with borderline rheumatic heart disease. High sensitivity (0·79 [0·73-0·84]), specificity (0·85 [0·80-0·89]), and overall accuracy (AUC 0·90 [0·85-0·94]) for screening rheumatic heart disease was observed when pooling data of handheld echocardiography versus standard echocardiography (seven studies; high certainty of evidence). Most studies had a low risk of bias overall. Some heterogeneity was observed for sensitivity and specificity across studies, possibly driven by differences in the prevalence and severity of rheumatic heart disease, and level of training or expertise of non-expert operators.

Interpretation: Handheld echocardiography has a high accuracy and diagnostic performance when compared with standard echocardiography for diagnosing and screening of rheumatic heart disease in high-prevalence areas.

Funding: World Health Organization.

Translations: For the Chinese, French, Italian, Persian, Portuguese, Spanish and Urdu translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.