4.5 Article

Human Competence to Transmit Leishmania infantum to Lutzomyia longipalpis and the Influence of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC TROP MED & HYGIENE
DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.16-0883

关键词

-

资金

  1. Brazil's Health Ministry [bid 779/2006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) caused by Leishmania infantum is a lethal disease transmitted by sand flies. Although, considered a zoonosis with dogs held as the main reservoirs, humans are also sources of infection. Therefore, control policies currently focused on dog culling may need to consider that VL and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/VL patients may also be infectious, contributing to transmission. Reservoir competence of patients with VL without and with HIV infection and of persons asymptomatically infected with Leishmania was assessed by xenodiagnosis with the vector Lutzomyia longipalpis. Parasites in sandfly's guts were identified by using optical microscopy and by conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Leishmania infantum blood parasite burden was determined by quantitative PCR. Among the 61 participants, 27 (44%) infected sand flies as seen by microscopy or PCR. When infectiousness was assessed by microscopy, xenodiagnosis was positive in five (25%) patients not infected with HIV, whereas nine (45%) of those harboring HIV were positive. Among the 19 asymptomatic patients four (21%) infected sand flies only demonstrated by PCR. One (50%) asymptomatic patient with HIV had a positive xenodiagnosis by microscopy. 9/372 (2.4%) and 37/398 (9.2%) sand flies were infected when feeding in patients without and with HIV, respectively. Infectiousness was poorly correlated with quantitative PCR. The study shows that asymptomatic humans are capable of transmitting L. infantum, that ill persons with HIV infection are more infectious to sand flies, and that humans are more important reservoirs than previously thought. This fact may be considered when designing control policies for zoonotic VL.

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

4.5
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