4.6 Article

Insights on 21 Years of HBV Surveillance in Blood Donors in France

Journal

VIRUSES-BASEL
Volume 14, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v14112507

Keywords

HBV; blood donations; NAT; occult B infection; acute HBV infection

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Analysis of HBV infection data among blood donors in France showed a decreasing trend in the number of cases, with the main risk factors being the origin of donors and parenteral exposure. Screening strategies and pathogen-reduction measures help ensure blood safety.
Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is the most frequent viral infection found in blood donors (BDs) in France. We analyzed the epidemiological and sero-molecular data on HBV infection gathered over the past two decades by the French haemovigilance surveillance network, blood screening laboratories, and the national reference center for transfusion infectious risks (NRC). Between 2000 and 2020, 6149 of the 58,160,984 donations (1.06/10,000) tested HBV positive, 98% of them from first-time blood donors (FTBDs). In addition, 2212 (0.0071%) of the 30,977,753 donations screened for HBV DNA tested DNA positive, of which 25 (1.1%) were positive only for this marker. HBV prevalence decreased by 2.8-fold and the residual risk for transfusion-transmitted HBV infection decreased 13-fold and was divided by 13. The major risk factor for HBV infection was the origin of donors (endemic country, 66.5%), followed by parenteral exposure (10.7%). In the whole HBV-positive BD population, genotype D was predominant (41.8%), followed by genotypes A (26.2%) and E (20.4%), reflecting the geographical origin of donors. The low and decreasing prevalence and incidence of HBV infection in French BDs, coupled with a screening strategy using three HBV markers (HBsAg, anti-HBc and DNA), ensures a high level of blood safety, further reinforced by the implementation of pathogen-reduction measures.

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