Key result
Non-physician screening echocardiography with remote interpretation identifies major heart disease in ~9% of pregnant women.
Why the study?
Heart disease has a significant impact on pregnancy, prompting evaluation of the feasibility of integrating screening echocardiography into Brazilian prenatal primary care to assess heart disease prevalence.
Is simplified echocardiography screening by non-physicians with remote interpretation feasible for detecting major heart disease in pregnant women in primary care?
Cross-Sectional (n=1,112)
Yes
Is simplified echocardiography screening by non-physicians with remote interpretation feasible for detecting major heart disease in pregnant women in primary care?
Echocardiographic screening by non-physicians with remote interpretation is feasible in primary prenatal care, identifying major heart disease in 9% of pregnant women, though severe disease prevalence was low.
Screening echo integration appears feasible in primary prenatal care; leaves open whether it improves detection or maternal outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Impact of heart disease (HD) on pregnancy is significant. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of integrating screening echocardiography (echo) into the Brazilian prenatal primary care to assess HD prevalence. METHODS: Over 13 months, 20 healthcare workers acquired simplified echo protocols, utilizing hand-held machines (GE-VSCAN), in 22 primary care centres. Consecutive pregnant women unaware of HD underwent focused echo, remotely interpreted in USA and Brazil. Major HD was defined as structural valve abnormalities, more than mild valve dysfunction, ventricular systolic dysfunction/hypertrophy, or other major abnormalities. Screen-positive women were referred for standard echo. RESULTS: At total, 1 112 women underwent screening. Mean age was 27 ± 8 years, mean gestational age 22 ± 9 weeks. Major HD was found in 100 (9.0%) patients. More than mild mitral regurgitation was observed in 47 (4.2%), tricuspid regurgitation in 11 (1.0%), mild left ventricular dysfunction in 4 (0.4%), left ventricular hypertrophy in 2 (0.2%) and suspected rheumatic heart disease in 36 (3.2%): all, with mitral valve and two with aortic valve (AV) involvement. Other AV disease was observed in 11 (10%). In 56 screen-positive women undergoing standard echo, major HD was confirmed in 45 (80.4%): RHD findings in 12 patients (all with mitral valve and two with AV disease), mitral regurgitation in 40 (14 with morphological changes, 10 suggestive of rheumatic heart disease), other AV disease in two (mild/moderate regurgitation). CONCLUSIONS: Integration of echo screening into primary prenatal care is feasible in Brazil. However, the low prevalence of severe disease urges further investigations about the effectiveness of the strategy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nascimento et al. (2020) conducted a cross-sectional in Heart disease in pregnancy (n=1,112). Screening echocardiography by non-physicians with remote interpretation was evaluated on Major heart disease (structural valve abnormalities, more than mild valve dysfunction, ventricular systolic dysfunction/hypertrophy, or other major abnormalities). Screening echocardiography by non-physicians with remote interpretation identified major heart disease in 9.0% of pregnant women.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: