4.2 Article

Human babesiosis in Alsace

期刊

MEDECINE ET MALADIES INFECTIEUSES
卷 50, 期 6, 页码 486-491

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.medmal.2019.08.007

关键词

Babesia divergens; Babesia microti; Babesiosis; Tick; Tick-borne diseases

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. - Human babesiosis is a rare parasitic anthropozoonosis transmitted to humans by tick bites. Fifty-six cases of human babesiosis have been recorded in Europe. Two cases of babesiosis were reported in Alsace, France, in 2009. We performed a retrospective observational descriptive study to assess the epidemiology of the disease in Alsace. Methods. - Patients were included if they had a positive serology result for Babesia and/or a positive blood smear and/or a positive PCR result. The tests were performed in the microbiology laboratories of the university hospitals of Strasbourg, the civil hospitals of Colmar, and the hospital of Mulhouse between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015. Included patients were divided into three groups: definite case group (positive PCR or positive blood smear or seroconversion), possible case group (positive serology results without seroconversion with a compatible clinical picture and without other confirmed diagnoses), and incompatible case group (positive serology results without seroconversion, without compatible clinical picture and/or with other confirmed diagnoses). The compatible clinical picture was defined by the presence of flu-like symptoms and fever (>= 38 degrees C). Results. - Fifty-one patients had at least one positive result. Three cases were excluded (missing files). There were six definite cases, 12 possible cases, and 30 incompatible cases. All patients in the definite case group were immunocompetent. No deaths occurred. Conclusions. - Human babesiosis is probably underdiagnosed due to its non-specific symptoms, lack of awareness about the disease, and the difficulty in making a diagnosis. (C) 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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