Over the past 5 years, the advent of echocardiographic screening for rheumatic heart disease (RHD) has revealed a higher RHD burden than previously thought. In light of this global experience, the development of new international echocardiographic guidelines that address the full spectrum of the rheumatic disease process is opportune. Systematic differences in the reporting of and diagnostic approach to RHD exist, reflecting differences in local experience and disease patterns. The World Heart Federation echocardiographic criteria for RHD have, therefore, been developed and are formulated on the basis of the best available evidence. Three categories are defined on the basis of assessment by 2D, continuous-wave, and color-Doppler echocardiography: ‘definite RHD’, ‘borderline RHD’, and ‘normal’. Four subcategories of ‘definite RHD’ and three subcategories of ‘borderline RHD’ exist, to reflect the various disease patterns. The morphological features of RHD and the criteria for pathological mitral and aortic regurgitation are also defined. The criteria are modified for those aged over 20 years on the basis of the available evidence. The standardized criteria aim to permit rapid and consistent identification of individuals with RHD without a clear history of acute rheumatic fever and hence allow enrollment into secondary prophylaxis programs. However, important unanswered questions remain about the importance of subclinical disease (borderline or definite RHD on echocardiography without a clinical pathological murmur), and about the practicalities of implementing screening programs. These standardized criteria will help enable new studies to be designed to evaluate the role of echocardiographic screening in RHD control.

Acute rheumatic fever (ARF) is the result of an autoimmune response to pharyngitis caused by infection with group A Streptococcus. The long-term damage to cardiac valves caused by ARF, which can result from a single severe episode or from multiple recurrent episodes of the illness, is known as rheumatic heart disease (RHD) and is a notable cause of morbidity and mortality in resource-poor settings around the world. Although our understanding of disease pathogenesis has advanced in recent years, this has not led to dramatic improvements in diagnostic approaches, which are still reliant on clinical features using the Jones Criteria, or treatment practices. Indeed, penicillin has been the mainstay of treatment for decades and there is no other treatment that has been proven to alter the likelihood or the severity of RHD after an episode of ARF. Recent advances — including the use of echocardiographic diagnosis in those with ARF and in screening for early detection of RHD, progress in developing group A streptococcal vaccines and an increased focus on the lived experience of those with RHD and the need to improve quality of life — give cause for optimism that progress will be made in coming years against this neglected disease that affects populations around the world, but is a particular issue for those living in poverty.

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.

The survival of patients to 28 years with the Mustard repair has been good. Late sudden death is the most worrisome feature. There is a 97% freedom from right ventricular failure to date. The quality of life of late survivors is good, most achieving a normal level of education and employment.