| Literature DB >> 22074048 |
Margaret Oluwatoyin Japhet1, Olufisayo Adeyemi Adesina, Emmanuel Donbraye, Moses Olubusuyi Adewumi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transfusion associated Hepatitis B virus (TAHBV) continues to be a major problem despite mandatory screening for Hepatitis B surface Antigen (HBsAg). Presence of HBsAg is the common method for detecting hepatitis B infection. Unfortunately, this marker is not detected during the window period of the infection. Nigeria being a developing country cannot afford DNA testing of all collected units of blood which serve as the only possibility of achieving zero risk of transfusion associated HBV. Five different serological makers of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection were therefore assessed to evaluate the reliability of using HBsAg marker alone in diagnosis of HBV infection among blood donors and to detect the serological evidence of the infection at the window period. This will preclude the possibility of transmitting hepatitis B through transfusion of Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative blood in Nigeria.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22074048 PMCID: PMC3239416 DOI: 10.1186/1743-422X-8-513
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Virol J ISSN: 1743-422X Impact factor: 4.099
Prevalence of Hepatitis B Virus Serological markers among blood donors
| SEROLOGICAL MARKERS | NUMBER OF SAMPLES | POSITIVE (%) |
|---|---|---|
| HBsAg | 92 | 18(19.6) |
| HBsAb | 92 | 14(15.2) |
| HBeAg | 45 | 4(8.9) |
| HBeAb | 45 | 12(26.7) |
| HBcIgM | 92 | 12(13.0) |
Donors showing detectable evidence of HBV infection by presence of at least one serological marker
| S/N | Sample code | Age | Sex | SEROLOGICAL MARKERS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HBsAg | HBsAb | HBcIgM | HBeAg | HBeAb | ||||
| 1 | 111 | 30 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 2 | 117 | 23 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 3 | 137 | 19 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 4 | 138 | 41 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 5 | 79 | 45 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 6 | 80 | 37 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 7 | 112 | 29 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 8 | 113 | 22 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 9 | 121 | 22 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 10 | 124 | 35 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 11 | 153 | 19 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 12 | 154 | 21 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 13 | 155 | 20 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 14 | 157 | 28 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 15 | 158 | 32 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 16 | 116 | 23 | M | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| 17 | 123 | 27 | M | ✓ | ||||
| 18 | 163 | 33 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 19 | 165 | 23 | M | ✓ | ||||
| 20 | 189 | 22 | M | ✓ | ||||
| 21 | 203 | 26 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 22 | 15-5 | 29 | M | ✓ | ||||
| 23 | 04 | 21 | M | ✓ | ||||
| 24 | 07 | 27 | F | ✓ | ||||
| 25 | 08 | 36 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 26 | 210 | 23 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 27 | 215 | 19 | F | ✓ | ||||
| 28 | 69 | 20 | F | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| 29 | 190 | 21 | M | ✓ | ||||
| 30 | 124 | 28 | M | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| TOTAL | 18 | 14 | 12 | 4 | 12 | |||
Sex distribution of blood donors with HBV markers
| Number Tested (%) | Positive (%) | Positive (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HBsAg | HBsAb | Anti-HBcIgM | No tested for HBeAg &Ab | HBeAg | HBeAb | ||
| Male | 69(75%) | 15 (21.7) | 13 (18.8) | 12 (17.4) | 45 | 4 (8.9) | 12(26.7) |
| Female | 23(25%) | 3 (13.0) | 1 (4.3) | 0 (0) | 45 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| Total | 92 | 18 | 14 | 12 | 45 | 4 | 12 |
Age distribution of blood donors with Hepatitis B Virus serological markers
| Positive (%) | Positive (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | No tested | HBsAg | HBsAb | HBcIgM | No tested | HBeAg | HBeAb |
| 18-23 | 49 | 8(16.3) | 6(12.2) | 4(8.2) | 19 | 2(10.5) | 6(31.6) |
| 24-29 | 18 | 5(27.8) | 2(11.1) | 4(22.2) | 6 | 0(0) | 2(33.3) |
| 30-35 | 13 | 1(7.7) | 3(23.1) | 3(23.1) | 10 | 0(0) | 2(20.0) |
| 36-41 | 10 | 3(30.0) | 2(20.0) | 1(10.0) | 8 | 1(12.5) | 1(12.5) |
| 42-47 | 2 | 1(50.0) | 1(50.0) | 0(0) | 2 | 0(0) | 1(50.0) |
| TOTAL | 92 | 18(19.6) | 14(15.2) | 12(13.0) | 45 | 4(8.9) | 12(26.7) |