4.6 Article

Age Is a Critical Risk Factor for Severe Fever with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111736

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81102171]
  2. Shandong Medical Science and Technology Development Program [2011HZ055]
  3. Shandong Province Science and Technology Development Plan [2012GHZ30031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Severe Fever with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (SFTS) is an emerging infectious disease in East Asia. SFTS is a tick borne hemorrhagic fever caused by SFTSV, a new bunyavirus named after the syndrome. We investigated the epidemiology of SFTS in Laizhou County, Shandong Province, China. Methods: We collected serum specimens of all patients who were clinically diagnosed as suspected SFTS cases in 2010 and 2011 in Laizhou County. The patients' serum specimens were tested for SFTSV by real time fluorescence quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). We collected 1,060 serum specimens from healthy human volunteers by random sampling in Laizhou County in 2011. Healthy persons' serum specimens were tested for specific SFTSV IgG antibody by ELISA. Results: 71 SFTS cases were diagnosed in Laizhou County in 2010 and 2011, which resulted in the incidence rate of 4.1/100,000 annually. The patients ranged from 15 years old to 87 years old and the median age of the patients were 59 years old. The incidence rate of SFTS was significantly higher in patients over 40 years old and fatal cases only occurred in patients over 50 years old. 3.3% (35/1,060) of healthy people were positive to SFTSV IgG antibody. The SFTSV antibody positive rate was not significantly different among people at different age groups. Conclusion: Our results revealed that seroprevalence of SFTSV in healthy people in Laizhou County was not significantly different among age groups, but SFTS patients were mainly elderly people, suggesting that age is the critical risk factor or determinant for SFTS morbidity and mortality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据