Comparison of approaches to determine echocardiographic outcomes for children with latent rheumatic heart disease.
Echocardiography
Global Health
Heart Valve Diseases
Journal
Open heart
ISSN: 2053-3624
Titre abrégé: Open Heart
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101631219
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
received:
28
09
2022
accepted:
14
11
2022
entrez:
1
12
2022
pubmed:
2
12
2022
medline:
6
12
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Screening programmes using echocardiography offer opportunity for intervention through identification and treatment of early (latent) rheumatic heart disease (RHD). We aimed to compare two methods for classifying progression or regression of latent RHD: serial review method and blinded, side-by-side review. A four-member expert panel reviewed 799 enrolment (in 2018) and completion (in 2020) echocardiograms from the GOAL Trial of latent RHD in Uganda to make consensus determination of normal, borderline RHD or definite RHD. Serial interpretations (enrolment and completion echocardiograms read at two different time points, 2 years apart, not beside one another) were compared with blinded side-by-side comparisons (enrolment and completion echocardiograms displayed beside one another in random order on same screen) to determine outcomes according to prespecified definitions of disease progression (worsening), regression (improving) or no change. We calculated inter-rater agreement using Cohen's kappa. There were 799 pairs of echocardiogram assessments included. A higher number, 54 vs 38 (6.8% vs 4.5%), were deemed as progression by serial interpretation compared with side-by-side comparison. There was good inter-rater agreement between the serial interpretation and side-by-side comparison methods (kappa 0.89). Disagreement was most often a result of the difference in classification between borderline RHD and mild definite RHD. Most discrepancies between interpretation methods (46 of 47, 98%) resulted from differences in valvular morphological evaluation, with valves judged to be morphologically similar between enrolment and final echocardiograms when compared side by side but classified differently on serial interpretation. There was good agreement between the methods of serial and side-by-side interpretation of echocardiograms for change over time, using the World Heart Federation criteria. Side-by-side interpretation has higher specificity for change, with fewer differences in the interpretation of valvular morphology, as compared with serial interpretation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Screening programmes using echocardiography offer opportunity for intervention through identification and treatment of early (latent) rheumatic heart disease (RHD). We aimed to compare two methods for classifying progression or regression of latent RHD: serial review method and blinded, side-by-side review.
METHODS
A four-member expert panel reviewed 799 enrolment (in 2018) and completion (in 2020) echocardiograms from the GOAL Trial of latent RHD in Uganda to make consensus determination of normal, borderline RHD or definite RHD. Serial interpretations (enrolment and completion echocardiograms read at two different time points, 2 years apart, not beside one another) were compared with blinded side-by-side comparisons (enrolment and completion echocardiograms displayed beside one another in random order on same screen) to determine outcomes according to prespecified definitions of disease progression (worsening), regression (improving) or no change. We calculated inter-rater agreement using Cohen's kappa.
RESULTS
There were 799 pairs of echocardiogram assessments included. A higher number, 54 vs 38 (6.8% vs 4.5%), were deemed as progression by serial interpretation compared with side-by-side comparison. There was good inter-rater agreement between the serial interpretation and side-by-side comparison methods (kappa 0.89). Disagreement was most often a result of the difference in classification between borderline RHD and mild definite RHD. Most discrepancies between interpretation methods (46 of 47, 98%) resulted from differences in valvular morphological evaluation, with valves judged to be morphologically similar between enrolment and final echocardiograms when compared side by side but classified differently on serial interpretation.
CONCLUSIONS
There was good agreement between the methods of serial and side-by-side interpretation of echocardiograms for change over time, using the World Heart Federation criteria. Side-by-side interpretation has higher specificity for change, with fewer differences in the interpretation of valvular morphology, as compared with serial interpretation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36455994
pii: openhrt-2022-002160
doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002160
pmc: PMC9716950
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/S005242/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2017 Jan 7;17(1):20
pubmed: 28061759
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 May;16(5):475-82
pubmed: 25564396
Int J Cardiol. 2021 Apr 1;328:146-151
pubmed: 33186665
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014 Jan;27(1):42-9
pubmed: 24183541
Heart. 2022 Apr;108(8):633-638
pubmed: 35110387
Int J Cardiol. 2021 Apr 1;328:163-164
pubmed: 33359287
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2012 Feb 28;9(5):297-309
pubmed: 22371105
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2017 Apr;30(4):303-371
pubmed: 28314623
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Jan 15;203:1003-4
pubmed: 26625330
Heart Asia. 2019 Jun 24;11(2):e011233
pubmed: 31297166
Sci Rep. 2019 Nov 19;9(1):17022
pubmed: 31745178
Heart Asia. 2016 Nov 28;8(2):67-73
pubmed: 27933106
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2016 Feb 19;16:46
pubmed: 26892774
Heart. 2016 May;102(9):658-64
pubmed: 26891757
Echocardiography. 2020 Jun;37(6):808-814
pubmed: 32524654
Ann Pediatr Cardiol. 2017 Jan-Apr;10(1):39-49
pubmed: 28163427
N Engl J Med. 2022 Jan 20;386(3):230-240
pubmed: 34767321
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017 Nov;10(11):
pubmed: 29133472
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2013 Jan;10(1):49-58
pubmed: 23149830
Int J Cardiol. 2019 Sep 15;291:112-118
pubmed: 30851993
Pediatr Cardiol. 2014 Oct;35(7):1259-67
pubmed: 24827080
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Dec 22;76(25):2982-3021
pubmed: 33309175