Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Acute rheumatic fever remains a serious healthcare concern for the majority of the world's population despite its decline in incidence in Europe and North America. The goal of this statement was to review the historic Jones criteria used to diagnose acute rheumatic fever in the context of the current epidemiology of the disease and to update those criteria to also take into account recent evidence supporting the use of Doppler echocardiography in the diagnosis of carditis as a major manifestation of acute rheumatic fever.
METHODS AND RESULTS: To achieve this goal, the American Heart Association's Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young and its Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee organized a writing group to comprehensively review and evaluate the impact of population-specific differences in acute rheumatic fever presentation and changes in presentation that can result from the now worldwide availability of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In addition, a methodological assessment of the numerous published studies that support the use of Doppler echocardiography as a means to diagnose cardiac involvement in acute rheumatic fever, even when overt clinical findings are not apparent, was undertaken to determine the evidence basis for defining subclinical carditis and including it as a major criterion of the Jones criteria. This effort has resulted in the first substantial revision to the Jones criteria by the American Heart Association since 1992 and the first application of the Classification of Recommendations and Levels of Evidence categories developed by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association to the Jones criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: This revision of the Jones criteria now brings them into closer alignment with other international guidelines for the diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever by defining high-risk populations, recognizing variability in clinical presentation in these high-risk populations, and including Doppler echocardiography as a tool to diagnose cardiac involvement.

© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

Abstract/Text: Primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever is accomplished by proper identification and adequate antibiotic treatment of group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal (GAS) tonsillopharyngitis. Diagnosis of GAS pharyngitis is best accomplished by combining clinical judgment with diagnostic test results, the criterion standard of which is the throat culture. Penicillin (either oral penicillin V or injectable benzathine penicillin) is the treatment of choice, because it is cost-effective, has a narrow spectrum of activity, and has long-standing proven efficacy, and GAS resistant to penicillin have not been documented. For penicillin-allergic individuals, acceptable alternatives include a narrow-spectrum oral cephalosporin, oral clindamycin, or various oral macrolides or azalides. The individual who has had an attack of rheumatic fever is at very high risk of developing recurrences after subsequent GAS pharyngitis and needs continuous antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent such recurrences (secondary prevention). The recommended duration of prophylaxis depends on the number of previous attacks, the time elapsed since the last attack, the risk of exposure to GAS infections, the age of the patient, and the presence or absence of cardiac involvement. Penicillin is again the agent of choice for secondary prophylaxis, but sulfadiazine or a macrolide or azalide are acceptable alternatives in penicillin-allergic individuals. This report updates the 1995 statement by the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee. It includes new recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of GAS pharyngitis, as well as for the secondary prevention of rheumatic fever, and classifies the strength of the recommendations and level of evidence supporting them.

Abstract/Text: Poststreptococcal reactive arthritis (PSRA) refers to a poststreptococcal arthritic condition that does not fulfill the Jones Criteria for diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever. Clinical features include additive rather than migratory arthritis that responds relatively poorly to salicylates and nonsteroidals; persistence for mean of 2 months; elevated acute phase reactants; and laboratory (usually serologic) evidence of recent group A streptococcal infection. PSRA is not associated with HLA-B27 but rather with HLA-DRB1*01. Because up to 6% of PSRA patients develop mitral valve disease, it is recommended that antistreptococcal prophylaxis be administered for 1 year and then discontinued if there is no evidence of cardiac involvement.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Acute rheumatic fever remains a serious healthcare concern for the majority of the world's population despite its decline in incidence in Europe and North America. The goal of this statement was to review the historic Jones criteria used to diagnose acute rheumatic fever in the context of the current epidemiology of the disease and to update those criteria to also take into account recent evidence supporting the use of Doppler echocardiography in the diagnosis of carditis as a major manifestation of acute rheumatic fever.
METHODS AND RESULTS: To achieve this goal, the American Heart Association's Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young and its Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee organized a writing group to comprehensively review and evaluate the impact of population-specific differences in acute rheumatic fever presentation and changes in presentation that can result from the now worldwide availability of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In addition, a methodological assessment of the numerous published studies that support the use of Doppler echocardiography as a means to diagnose cardiac involvement in acute rheumatic fever, even when overt clinical findings are not apparent, was undertaken to determine the evidence basis for defining subclinical carditis and including it as a major criterion of the Jones criteria. This effort has resulted in the first substantial revision to the Jones criteria by the American Heart Association since 1992 and the first application of the Classification of Recommendations and Levels of Evidence categories developed by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association to the Jones criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: This revision of the Jones criteria now brings them into closer alignment with other international guidelines for the diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever by defining high-risk populations, recognizing variability in clinical presentation in these high-risk populations, and including Doppler echocardiography as a tool to diagnose cardiac involvement.

© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Rheumatic fever continues to put a significant burden on the health of low socio-economic populations in low and middle-income countries despite the near disappearance of the disease in the developed world over the past century. Antibiotics have long been thought of as an effective method for preventing the onset of acute rheumatic fever following a Group-A streptococcal (GAS) throat infection; however, their use has not been widely adopted in developing countries for the treatment of sore throats. We have used the tools of systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the effectiveness of antibiotic treatment for sore throat, with symptoms suggestive of group A streptococcal (GAS) infection, for the primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever.
METHODS: Trials were identified through a systematic search of titles and abstracts found in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2003), MEDLINE (1966-2003), EMBASE (1966-2003), and the reference lists of identified studies. The selection criteria included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of antibiotics versus no antibiotics for the prevention of rheumatic fever in patients presenting with a sore throat, with or without confirmation of GAS infection, and no history of rheumatic fever.
RESULTS: Ten trials (n = 7665) were eligible for inclusion in this review. The methodological quality of the studies, in general, was poor. All of the included trials were conducted during the period of 1950 and 1961 and in 8 of the 10 trials the study population consisted of young adult males living on United States military bases. Fixed effects, meta-analysis revealed an overall protective effect for the use of antibiotics against acute rheumatic fever of 70% (RR = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.21-0.48). The absolute risk reduction was 1.67% with an NNT of 53. When meta-analysis was restricted to include only trials evaluating penicillin, a protective effect of 80% was found (Fixed effect RR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11-0.36) with an NNT of 60. The marginal cost of preventing one case of rheumatic fever by a single intramuscular injection of penicillin is approximately USD 46 in South Africa.
CONCLUSION: Antibiotics appear to be effective in reducing the incidence of acute rheumatic fever following an episode of suspected GAS pharyngitis. This effect may be achieved at relatively low cost if a single intramuscular penicillin injection is administered.

Abstract/Text: Acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and its chronic sequela, rheumatic heart disease (RHD), have become rare in most affluent populations, but remain unchecked in developing countries and in some poor, mainly indigenous populations in wealthy countries. More than a century of research, mainly in North America and Europe, has improved our understanding of ARF and RHD. However, whether traditional views need to be updated in view of the epidemiological shift of the past 50 years is still to be established, and improved data from developing countries are needed. Doctors who work in populations with a high incidence of ARF are adapting existing diagnostic guidelines to increase their sensitivity. Group A streptococcal vaccines are still years away from being available and, even if the obstacles of serotype coverage and safety can be overcome, their cost could make them inaccessible to the populations that need them most. New approaches to primary prevention are needed given the limitations of primary prophylaxis as a population-based strategy. The most effective approach for control of ARF and RHD is secondary prophylaxis, which is best delivered as part of a coordinated control programme.

Abstract/Text: Primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever is accomplished by proper identification and adequate antibiotic treatment of group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal (GAS) tonsillopharyngitis. Diagnosis of GAS pharyngitis is best accomplished by combining clinical judgment with diagnostic test results, the criterion standard of which is the throat culture. Penicillin (either oral penicillin V or injectable benzathine penicillin) is the treatment of choice, because it is cost-effective, has a narrow spectrum of activity, and has long-standing proven efficacy, and GAS resistant to penicillin have not been documented. For penicillin-allergic individuals, acceptable alternatives include a narrow-spectrum oral cephalosporin, oral clindamycin, or various oral macrolides or azalides. The individual who has had an attack of rheumatic fever is at very high risk of developing recurrences after subsequent GAS pharyngitis and needs continuous antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent such recurrences (secondary prevention). The recommended duration of prophylaxis depends on the number of previous attacks, the time elapsed since the last attack, the risk of exposure to GAS infections, the age of the patient, and the presence or absence of cardiac involvement. Penicillin is again the agent of choice for secondary prophylaxis, but sulfadiazine or a macrolide or azalide are acceptable alternatives in penicillin-allergic individuals. This report updates the 1995 statement by the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee. It includes new recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of GAS pharyngitis, as well as for the secondary prevention of rheumatic fever, and classifies the strength of the recommendations and level of evidence supporting them.