4.3 Article

Human coronavirus and severe acute respiratory infection in Southern Brazil

期刊

PATHOGENS AND GLOBAL HEALTH
卷 110, 期 3, 页码 113-118

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/20477724.2016.1181294

关键词

Human Coronavirus; Epidemiology; Respiratory infections; Severe acute respiratory infection; RT-PCR multiplex

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human coronaviruses (HCoVs) are an important cause of respiratory tract infection and are responsible for causing the common cold in the general population. Thus, adequate surveillance of HCoV is essential. This study aimed to analyze the impact of HCoV infections and their relation to severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) in a hospitalized population in Southern Brazil. A cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital, and assessed inpatients under investigation for SARI by the hospital epidemiology department, and all patients who had nasopharyngeal aspirates collected from January 2012 to December 2013 to detect respiratory viruses (RVs). Viral infection was detected by multiplex reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), with primers specific to the subtypes HCoV-229E/NL63 and OC43/HKU1. The overall positivity rate was 58.8% (444/755), and HCoVs were detected in 7.6% (n = 34) of positive samples. Children below two years of age were most frequently affected (62%). Comorbidities were more likely to be associated with HCoVs than with other RVs. Immunosuppression was an independent risk factor for HCoV infection (OR = 3.5, 95% CI 1.6-7.6). Dyspnea was less frequently associated with HCoV infection (p < 0.001), and HCoV accounted for 6% of the SARI cases. Three patients infected with HCoV (9%) died from respiratory infection. HCoVs are important respiratory pathogens, especially in hospitalized children under 2 years of age and in immunosuppressed patients. They may account for a small proportion of SARI diagnoses, increased need for mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and death.

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