4.6 Review

Emerging Human Babesiosis with Ground Zero in North America

Journal

MICROORGANISMS
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9020440

Keywords

human babesiosis; Babesia spp; Babesia microti; Babesia divergens; Babesia venatorum; Babesia duncani; Babesia crassa

Categories

Funding

  1. National Key Basic Research Program (973 Program) of China [2015CB150300]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFD0501200]
  3. Ross University School of Veterinary Medicine [41002-2021]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The first case of human babesiosis was reported in 1957, and since then sporadic cases have been reported in North America and Europe, with an increase in cases in Asia, South America, and Africa in recent years. More than 20,000 cases have been reported in North America alone, showing a widespread distribution of these tick-borne pathogens in both urban and rural populations, affecting both immunocompromised and immunocompetent individuals.
The first case of human babesiosis was reported in the literature in 1957. The clinical disease has sporadically occurred as rare case reports in North America and Europe in the subsequent decades. Since the new millennium, especially in the last decade, many more cases have apparently appeared not only in these regions but also in Asia, South America, and Africa. More than 20,000 cases of human babesiosis have been reported in North America alone. In several cross-sectional surveys, exposure to Babesia spp. has been demonstrated within urban and rural human populations with clinical babesiosis reported in both immunocompromised and immunocompetent humans. This review serves to highlight the widespread distribution of these tick-borne pathogens in humans, their tick vectors in readily accessible environments such as parks and recreational areas, and their phylogenetic relationships.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available