4.3 Article

Consecutive Outbreaks of Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli O6 in Schools in South Korea Caused by Contamination of Fermented Vegetable Kimchi

期刊

FOODBORNE PATHOGENS AND DISEASE
卷 13, 期 10, 页码 535-543

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/fpd.2016.2147

关键词

outbreak of gastroenteritis; ETEC; kimchi; PFGE

资金

  1. Korea National Institute of Health [NIH 4800-4851-304]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Two outbreaks of gastroenteritis occurred in South Korea, affecting a middle school in the Jeollanam-do province in 2013 (Outbreak 1) and 10 schools in the Incheon province in 2014 (Outbreak 2). We investigated the outbreaks to identify the pathogen and mode of transmission. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Outbreak 1; and case-control studies were performed for the Outbreak 2. Samples from students, environments, and preserved food items were collected and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was conducted to identify strains of pathogen. Results: We identified 167 and 1022 students who met the case definition (3 loose stools in any 24-h period) in the Outbreaks 1 and 2, respectively. The consumption of cabbage kimchi and young radish kimchi were significantly associated with the illness. Adjusted odds ratios of kimchi were 2.62-11.74. In the Outbreak 1, cabbage kimchi was made and consumed in the school restaurant and in the Outbreak 2, young radish kimchi was supplied by food company X and distributed to all the 10 schools in the Incheon province. Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) O6 was isolated from fecal samples in 375 cases (33.9%) and from kimchi samples. PFGE patterns of the outbreak strains isolated from cases and food were indistinguishable in each outbreak. Conclusion: The suspected food vehicle in these two consecutive outbreaks was kimchi contaminated with ETEC O6. We recommend continued monitoring and stricter sanitation requirements for the food supply process in Korea, especially in relation to kimchi.

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

4.3
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