4.7 Article

Emergence of Parechovirus A3 as the Leading Cause of Central Nervous System Infection, Surpassing Any Single Enterovirus Type, in Children in Kansas City, Missouri, USA, from 2007 to 2016

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 59, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02935-20

关键词

infants; parechovirus; enterovirus; epidemiology; central nervous system infections; children

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A study on pediatric central nervous system infections in the United States found that picornaviruses, such as EV and PeV-A, were the most common causes, with PeV-A3 being the dominant type. The detection of multiple EV and two PeV-A types in children's cerebrospinal fluid suggests routine testing and reporting of PeV-A, especially in infants under 6 months old. This could help reduce hospital stays and antibiotic usage in young children with acute febrile illnesses.
Picornaviruses, including Enterovirus species A to D (EV) and Parechovirus species A (PeV-A), are the leading reported causes of pediatric central nervous system infections in the United States. We investigated the molecular epidemiology of EV and PeV-A over 10 years in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) collected from children seen at Children's Mercy-Kansas City (CMKC) from 2007 through 2016. The overall prevalence for EV was 16% (862/5,362) and 7% (271/4,016) for PeV. Among all picornavirus CSF detections, EV was 76%, and PeV-A was 24%. Multiple EV types cocirculated each year, with a total of 31 EV types detected in the 10-year period; the majority belonged to EV-B species (96%). Two PeV-A types were detected; PeV-A3 was the dominant PeV-A type (95%). The top five picornaviruses (PeV-A3, 26%; E30, 11%; E6, 10%; E18, 9%; E9, 7%) in the CSF of infants accounted for two-thirds of all detections, and PeV-A3 was the leading picornavirus detected. Routine testing and reporting of PeV-A in addition to EV, especially in children under 6 months old with acute febrile illnesses, could reduce hospital stays and antibiotic usage.

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

4.7
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