Literature DB >> 19239765

Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus in high-risk population, Turkey.

Turabi Gunes1, Aynur Engin, Omer Poyraz, Nazif Elaldi, Safak Kaya, Ilyas Dokmetas, Mehmet Bakir, Ziynet Cinar.   

Abstract

In the Tokat and Sivas provinces of Turkey, the overall Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) seroprevalence was 12.8% among 782 members of a high-risk population. CCHFV seroprevalence was associated with history of tick bite or tick removal from animals, employment in animal husbandry or farming, and being >40 years of age.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19239765      PMCID: PMC2681111          DOI: 10.3201/eid1503.080687

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis        ISSN: 1080-6040            Impact factor:   6.883


Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) infection was first defined in Turkey in 2003 from persons who became sick during a 2002 CCHFV outbreak (,). During 2002–2007, CCHFV was confirmed serologically, virologically, or by both types of testing, in ≈1,800 persons, mainly in the Tokat and Sivas provinces of Turkey (Figure 1) (). This region was then considered an epicenter for CCHFV epidemics (). This study determined the seroprevalence of CCHFV in a high-risk population living in that region after 4 epidemic seasons and assessed transmission routes of CCHFV infection.
Figure 1

Districts of Tokat and Sivas provinces, Turkey, from which 782 persons at high risk for Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) infection were sampled, 2006. Sample sites are indicated by black dots. (Map provided by Zati Vatansever and reproduced with permission.)

Districts of Tokat and Sivas provinces, Turkey, from which 782 persons at high risk for Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) infection were sampled, 2006. Sample sites are indicated by black dots. (Map provided by Zati Vatansever and reproduced with permission.)

The Study

In June and September 2006, persons living in 56 villages of the 14 districts of Tokat and Sivas provinces (Figure 1) who had a risk for CCHFV infection other than occupational risk (i.e., healthcare, slaughterhouse work, and veterinary care) were randomly selected for the study. Villages and districts were selected based on residences of patients who were diagnosed with CCHFV infection and treated at Cumhuriyet University Hospital, Sivas, Turkey, during the 2005 CCHFV outbreak. Men and women were included in the study, but children <7 years of age were excluded because of difficulties in drawing blood samples and obtaining parental consent. Using EPI Info version 6 software (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA) and assuming a CCHFV seroprevalence of 10% in the study population with 99% confidence levels, we calculated error limits of ± 3% and a design effect of 1. The estimated sample size required was 664, but the target sample size of high-risk persons was increased to 782. Another 100 persons who were not at high risk for CCHFV infection, but who lived in urban areas in the high-risk region and agreed to provide blood samples, were also included in the study. The study protocol was approved by the Cumhuriyet University Hospital Human Ethics Committee. The CCHFV Seroprevalence Study Team in Turkey included a physician and a nurse who went to the selected villages and approached the heads of the village and selected families. They explained the objectives of the study and asked for written informed consent from participants or parents of participating minors and then administered an interview-based questionnaire and collected a blood sample. The questionnaire considered the following variables: age; sex; history of tick bite, tick removal from animals, animal abortion, and animal slaughtering activity; close contact with a CCHFV patient or an animal; and occupation. Blood samples (10 mL each) were collected and later tested for antibodies to CCHFV by using immunoglobulin G (IgG) ELISA kits (Vector-Best; Kolsovo, Novosibirsk, Russia). SPSS version 10.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA) for Windows software was used for statistical analysis. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to compare categorical variables. Statistical significance was defined as a 2-tailed p value <0.05. Univariate analysis was used to identify the risk factors for seropositivity of CCHFV in the 782 participants. Of the 782 high-risk persons, 100 were positive for IgG against CCHFV (seroprevalence 12.8%). The sex ratio was ≈1:1 (390 females, 392 males). Forty-seven (12.1%) of 390 female participants and 53 (13.5%) of 392 male participants were seropositive for CCHFV (p>0.05). Mean age was 41.5 years. Of the 100 serum samples collected in the urban population, only 2 (males 44 and 56 years of age) were seropositive. The CCHFV seroprevalence in the 782 persons at high risk increased significantly with age (p<0.001). The highest proportion (23.5%) of seropositivity was found in persons 61–70 years of age (p<0.001) (Table 1). Figure 2 shows distribution of the CCHFV seroprevalence in high-risk persons by age groups. The only variables significantly associated with presence of antibody against CCHFV were history of tick bite (p = 0.002) or of tick removal from the animals (p = 0.03), employment in animal husbandry (p = 0.01) or farming (p = 0.02), and age >40 years (p<0.001) (Table 2).
Table 1

Demographics and seroprevalence of CCHFV in persons living in rural and urban areas of Tokat and Sivas provinces, Turkey, 2006*

CharacteristicPersons living in rural area (n = 782)Persons living in urban area (n = 100)
Age, y
Mean ± SD41.5 ± 18.641.9 ± 18.4
Range
7–83
7–80
Gender, no. (%)
Female390 (49.8)53 (53)
Male
392 (50.2)
47 (47)
Total seroprevalence, no. positive (%)
100 (12.8)
2 (2)
Seroprevalence by gender, no. positive/no. tested (%)†
Female47/390 (12.1)0/53 (0)
Male
53/392 (13.5)
2/47 (4.3)
Seroprevalence by age, y, no. positive/no. tested (%)‡
7–204/138 (2.9)0/14 (0)
21–309/100 (9)0/18 (0)
31–4014/134 (10.5)0/15 (0)
41–5020/126 (15.901/18 (5.6)
51–6023/157 (14.6)1/17(5.9)
61–7020/85 (23.5)0/13 (0)
71–8310/45 (22.2)0/5 (0)

*CCHFV, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus.
†p value = 0.59 for persons living in rural area; for persons living in urban area, data are insufficient for statistical analysis.
‡p value <0.001 for persons living in rural area; for persons living in urban area, data are insufficient for statistical analysis.

Figure 2

Distribution of seroprevalence of immunoglobulin G against Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus by age groups for 782 high-risk persons living in rural areas of Tokat and Sivas provinces, Turkey, 2006.

Table 2

Demographic features and risk factors associated with CCHFV seroprevalence (univariate analysis) for persons living in rural areas of Tokat and Sivas provinces, Turkey, 2006*

Risk factor categoryNo. seropositive persons/total population (%)p value
Age >40 y73/410 (17.8)<0.001
History of tick bite78/483 (11.5)0.002
Tick removal from the animals69/450 (15.3)0.03
Animal abortion19/135 (14.1)0.67
Slaughtering activity25/151 (16.6)0.18
Contact with CCHFV patient14/89 (15.7)0.44
Contact with an animal
97/734 (16.6)
0.26
Job
Farmer93/656 (14.2)0.02
Animal husbandry94/664 (14.2)0.01
Milking35/263 (13.3)0.79
Student
1/38 (2.6)
0.11
Total no. seropositive persons100/782 (12.8)

*CCHFV, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus.

*CCHFV, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus.
†p value = 0.59 for persons living in rural area; for persons living in urban area, data are insufficient for statistical analysis.
‡p value <0.001 for persons living in rural area; for persons living in urban area, data are insufficient for statistical analysis. Distribution of seroprevalence of immunoglobulin G against Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus by age groups for 782 high-risk persons living in rural areas of Tokat and Sivas provinces, Turkey, 2006. *CCHFV, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus.

Conclusions

Serologic evidence of CCHFV in Turkey was reported in the 1970s (). In 2003, the CCHFV seroprevalence among 40 veterinarians in the Tokat region was 2.5% (). Another seroprevalence study conducted in 2003 among healthcare workers providing care to CCHFV patients in Turkey detected no seropositive persons (). The present survey indicates that the seroprevalence of CCHFV is higher in persons living in rural areas than in urban areas of the CCHFV epicenter in Turkey (12.8% vs 2.0%). However, because special markets for animal trading are located on the outskirts of large cities in Iran, CCHFV seroprevalence was found to be higher among persons living in urban areas than in persons living in rural areas of this country (). Living in a rural area is a risk factor for exposure to the tick vector and for acquiring CCHFV infection (,). Expected seroprevalence of CCHFV among high-risk persons during epidemics has been found to be 10% (); however, seroprevalence has been reported to be as low as 0.5% in nonepidemic situations (). Other studies conducted in rural parts of Iran and Senegal during epidemics showed that the CCHFV seroprevalence was 13%, comparable to our findings (,). In the present study, history of tick bite and history of tick removal from animals were found to be significantly associated with CCHFV seropositivity. The overall tick-bite frequency was 62% (483/782) among persons at high risk and has been reported among 40%–60% of CCHFV patients in Turkey (). We also determined that the occupations of animal husbandry and farming were significantly associated with CCHFV seropositivity. Vector ticks are generally present on the ground and on animals, which explains the risk for CCHFV infection in persons who work in farming and animal husbandry. Personal protective measures such as regular examination of clothing and skin for ticks, tick removal, and use of repellents are important to prevent CCHFV infection (). We did not identify any association between seroprevalence and gender but found that CCHFV seropositivity increased with age. In these regions of Turkey, women contribute to farming and animal husbandry tasks and are exposed to ticks and livestock as often as men are. However, age >40 years was significantly associated with CCHFV seropositivity and reflects the age of workers in Turkish agricultural areas (,,). Increased CCHFV seroprevalence with age may result from increased opportunities of contact with vector ticks (). Exposure to blood and tissues of viremic animals during slaughter is a source of infection (,). However, we did not identify any association between CCHFV seropositivity and contact with animals. This finding may result from a low number of viremic animals in our study region. It is known that domestic animals generally have low levels of viremia, which lasts a short time (). However, in our study region, 79% of animals have been found to be seropositive against CCHFV (). In the study population, 89 (11.4%) persons had a history of close contact with a CCHFV-infected patient. Among these 89 persons, 14 (15.7%) were seropositive, but this transmission route for CCHFV was not statistically significant for our study population. However, protection against this potential transmission route is especially important for healthcare workers in hospitals that provide care to CCHFV case-patients (). This study indicated that tick exposure is the most statistically significant transmission route for CCHFV in a high-risk population in Turkey. Effective tick prevention aids such as tick repellents may help reduce the risk. On the other hand, the absence of CCHFV seropositivity in 87.2% of the population after 4 CCHFV outbreaks in Turkey may suggest that this population remains at risk for infection in the future. This knowledge may help public health authorities determine appropriate CCHFV intervention and prevention methods.
  12 in total

Review 1.  The epidemiology of tick-borne Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in Asia, Europe, and Africa.

Authors:  H Hoogstraal
Journal:  J Med Entomol       Date:  1979-05-22       Impact factor: 2.278

2.  Characteristics of patients with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in a recent outbreak in Turkey and impact of oral ribavirin therapy.

Authors:  Onder Ergönül; Aysel Celikbaş; Başak Dokuzoguz; Sebnem Eren; Nurcan Baykam; Harika Esener
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2004-07-02       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Zoonotic infections among veterinarians in Turkey: Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever and beyond.

Authors:  Onder Ergönül; Herve Zeller; Selçuk Kiliç; Selda Kutlu; Murat Kutlu; Senel Cavusoglu; Berrin Esen; Başak Dokuzoğuz
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2006-09-15       Impact factor: 3.623

4.  Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in Eastern Turkey: clinical features, risk factors and efficacy of ribavirin therapy.

Authors:  Zulal Ozkurt; Ilhami Kiki; Serpil Erol; Fuat Erdem; Neziha Yilmaz; Mehmet Parlak; Mehmet Gundogdu; Mehmet A Tasyaran
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2005-06-13       Impact factor: 6.072

5.  Seroprevalence of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in Sistan-va-Baluchestan province of Iran.

Authors:  Shahrokh Izadi; Kourosh Holakouie-Naieni; Seyed Reza Majdzadeh; Sadegh Chinikar; Abolhassan Nadim; Fatemeh Rakhshani; Badakhshan Hooshmand
Journal:  Jpn J Infect Dis       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 1.362

6.  Crimean hemorrhagic fever-Congo (CHF-C) virus antibodies in man, and in domestic and small mammals, in Iran.

Authors:  S Saidi; J Casals; M A Faghih
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  1975-03       Impact factor: 2.345

7.  Antibodies to haemorrhagic fever viruses in Madagascar populations.

Authors:  C C Mathiot; D Fontenille; A J Georges; P Coulanges
Journal:  Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg       Date:  1989 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.184

8.  Risk factors for Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in rural northern Senegal.

Authors:  L E Chapman; M L Wilson; D B Hall; B LeGuenno; E A Dykstra; K Ba; S P Fisher-Hoch
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 5.226

9.  [Epidemiological evaluation of a possible outbreak in and nearby Tokat province].

Authors:  Ayşegül Gözalan; Levent Akin; Jean-Marc Rolain; Fatih Sua Tapar; Ozgür Oncül; Hiroshi Yoshikura; Herve Zeller; Didier Raoult; Berrin Esen
Journal:  Mikrobiyol Bul       Date:  2004 Jan-Apr       Impact factor: 0.622

Review 10.  Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever.

Authors:  Onder Ergönül
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 25.071

View more
  24 in total

Review 1.  The arrival, establishment and spread of exotic diseases: patterns and predictions.

Authors:  Sarah E Randolph; David J Rogers
Journal:  Nat Rev Microbiol       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 60.633

2.  Evaluation of cases with a preliminary diagnosis of Crimean- Congo hemorrhagic fever and comparison of characteristics in patients admitted to a secondary care hospital in Kastamonu, Turkey.

Authors:  Hüseyin Can Hekimoğlu; Neşe Ateş Demirci
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 0.927

3.  Distribution and seasonal activity of tick species on cattle in the West Aegean region of Turkey.

Authors:  Serkan Bakirci; Hakan Sarali; Levent Aydin; Hasan Eren; Tulin Karagenc
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 2.132

4.  Species distribution and detection of Crimean Congo Hemorrhagic Fever Virus (CCHFV) in field-collected ticks in Ankara Province, Central Anatolia, Turkey.

Authors:  Olcay Hekimoglu; Nurdan Ozer; Koray Ergunay; Aykut Ozkul
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2011-09-11       Impact factor: 2.132

5.  Serosurvey and molecular detection of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) in northern Turkey.

Authors:  Harun Albayrak; Emre Ozan; Mitat Kurt
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 1.559

6.  An antigenic investigation of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) in hard ticks from provinces in northern Turkey.

Authors:  Harun Albayrak; Emre Ozan; Mitat Kurt
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 1.559

7.  Evaluation of patients with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in Bolu, Turkey.

Authors:  A Duran; A Küçükbayrak; T Ocak; N I Hakyemez; T Taþ; M Karadađ; Z F Mengelođlu
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 0.927

8.  Investigation of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus transmission from patients to relatives: a prospective contact tracing study.

Authors:  Mustafa Gokhan Gozel; Mehmet Bakir; Atifet Yasemin Oztop; Aynur Engin; Ilyas Dokmetas; Nazif Elaldi
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 2.345

9.  Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever: epidemiological trends and controversies in treatment.

Authors:  Helena C Maltezou; Anna Papa
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 8.775

10.  Subclinical infections with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus, Turkey.

Authors:  Hürrem Bodur; Esragül Akinci; Sibel Ascioglu; Pinar Öngürü; Yavuz Uyar
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 6.883

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.