| Literature DB >> 24069491 |
Lin Wang1, Lihua Xiao, Liping Duan, Jianbin Ye, Yaqiong Guo, Meijin Guo, Lili Liu, Yaoyu Feng.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over 200 cryptosporidiosis outbreaks have been reported, but little is known if other enteric pathogens were also involved in some of these outbreaks. Recently, an outbreak of cryptosporidiosis linked to poor hygiene by two Cryptosporidium hominis subtypes occurred in a pediatric hospital ward (Ward A) in China, lasting for more than 14 months. In this study, the concurrence during the outbreak of three other enteric pathogens with a similar transmission route, Giardia duodenalis, Enterocytozoon bieneusi, and Clostridium difficile, was assessed. METHODS/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24069491 PMCID: PMC3772047 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002437
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Figure 1Infection rates of study pathogens in case and control wards.
There were 74 children in case ward (Ward A), 283 and 216 children in control wards (Wards C and D).
Distribution of Giardia duodenalis, Enterocytozoon bieneusi, and Clostridium difficile infections in pediatric inpatients by ward and Cryptosporidium infection status.
|
|
|
| ||||||||
| Factors | Specimen size | Positive no. (%) | OR (95% CI |
| Positive no. (%) | OR (95% CI |
| Positive no. (%) | OR (95% CI |
|
| Hospital ward | ||||||||||
| Case Ward (A) | 74 | 7 (9.5) | 12.9 (3.7, 45.3) |
| 8 (10.8) | 3.7 (1.5, 8.9) |
| 45 (60.8) | 3.1 (1.9, 5.1) |
|
| Control Wards (C and D) | 499 | 4 (0.8) | Reference | 16 (3.2) | Reference | 167 (33.5) | Reference | |||
| Cryptosporidiosis status | ||||||||||
| Yes | 48 | 3 (6.3) | 4.3 (1.1, 16.8) | 0.08 | 5 (10.4) | 3.1 (1.1, 8.7) |
| 34 (70.8) | 4.7 (2.5, 9.1) |
|
| No | 525 | 8 (1.5) | Reference | 19 (3.6) | Reference | 178 (33.9) | Reference | |||
CI: confidence interval.
Bold numbers: P values≤0.05 by Chi-square test.
Distribution of study pathogen infections in case (A) and control (C and D) wards by age, gender, and diarrhea status.
| Group | Positive/total no. (%) for | Positive/total no. (%) for | Positive/total no. (%) for | ||||||
| Total | Ward A | Wards C & D | Total | Ward A | Wards C & D | Total | Ward A | Wards C & D | |
| Age (months) | |||||||||
| 1–6 | 2/99 (2.0) | 1/39 (2.6) | 1/60 (1.7) | 11/99 (11.1) | 7/39 (17.9) | 4/60 (6.7) | 38/99 (38.4) | 26/39 (66.7) | 12/60 (20.0) |
| 7–12 | 4/178 (2.2) | 4/20 (20.0) | 0/158 (0) | 4/178 (2.2) | 0/20 (0) | 4/158 (2.5) | 86/178 (48.3) | 12/20 (60.0) | 74/158 (46.8) |
| >12 | 5/295 (1.7) | 2/15 (13.3) | 3/280 (1.1) | 8/295 (2.7) | 1/15 (6.7) | 7/280 (2.5) | 88/295 (29.8) | 7/15 (46.7) | 81/280 (28.9) |
| Gender | |||||||||
| Male | 6/388 (1.5) | 4/43 (9.3) | 2/345 (0.6) | 13/388 (3.4) | 2/43 (4.7) | 11/345 (3.2) | 137/388 (35.3) | 27/43 (62.8) | 110/345 (31.9) |
| Female | 5/184 (2.7) | 3/31 (9.7) | 2/153 (1.3) | 10/184 (5.4) | 6/31 (19.4) | 4/153 (2.6) | 75/184 (40.8) | 18/31 (58.1) | 57/153 (37.3) |
| Diarrhea | |||||||||
| Yes | 5/223 (2.2) | 3/43 (7.0) | 2/180 (1.1) | 11/223 (4.9) | 3/43 (7.0) | 8/180 (4.4) | 73/223 (32.7) | 27/43 (62.8) | 46/180 (25.6) |
| No | 6/350 (1.7) | 4/31 (12.9) | 2/319 (0.6) | 13/350 (3.7) | 5/31 (16.1) | 8/319 (2.5) | 139/350 (39.7) | 18/31 (58.1) | 121/319 (37.9) |
One child from Ward C and one child from Ward D did not have age and gender information, respectively.
Distribution of Giardia duodenalis, Enterocytozoon bieneusi, and Clostridium difficile genotypes or subtypes.
| Pathogen | Source | No. positive/sample size (%) | Genotypes/subtypes (No. positive) | |
| Dominant | Others | |||
|
| Ward A, Hospital I | 7/74 (9.5) | AII (6) | |
| Ward C, Hospital I | 4/283 (1.4) | AII (2), B (2) | ||
| Ward D, Hospital I | 0/216 (0) | |||
| Other wards, Hospital I | 4/1019 (0.4) | AII (1), B (3) | ||
| Unknown wards, Hospital I | 17/1653 (1.0) | AII (12) | B (3) | |
| Hospitals II and III | 8/800 (1.0) | AII (4), B (3) | ||
|
| Ward A, Hospital I | 8/74 (10.8) | Peru 11 (4) | SH1–4 (1 each) |
| Ward C, Hospital I | 8/283 (2.8) | Peru 11, EbpC, EbpA, SH2, SH5–8 (1 each) | ||
| Ward D, Hospital I | 8/216 (3.7) | Peru 11, EbpA, D, SH2, SH9–12 (1 each) | ||
|
| Ward A, Hospital I | 45/74 (60.8) | fr-01 (15) | og39-01 (6), kr-03 (5), fr-sh1 (2), fr-sh4 (1), sh-01 (1), hr-01 (1), gc11-01 (1), xr-03 (1), kr-03 & sh-01 (4), kr-03 & og39-01 (1), sh-01 & og39-01 (2) |
| Ward C, Hospital I | 107/283 (37.8) | kr-03 (18) | og39-01 (13), fr-01 (13), hr-01 (7), gr-01 (5), sh-01 (3), xr-03 (2), fr-sh3 (1), gc11-01 (1), og39-sh1 (1), smz-02 (1), j52-01 (1), yok-01 (1), serogroup D (1), kr-03 & og39-01 (3), gc11-01 & xr-sh1 (1), kr-03 & sh-01 (1), kr-03 & serogroup D (1) | |
| Ward D, Hospital I | 60/216 (27.8) | kr-03 (13) | og39-01 (9), hr-01 (4), gr-01 (4), fr-01 (3), fr-sh1 (1), fr-sh2 (1), fr-sh4 (1), og39-sh1 (1), sh-02 (1), yok-01 (1), nc0930-01 (1), kr-03 & sh-01 (3), kr-03 & xr-03 (1), kr-03 & og39-01 (1), sh-01 & og39-01 (1) |
Four G. duodenalis-positive specimens belonging to tpi A2, including one from Ward A, two from unknown wards, and one from Hospital III, failed in multilocus subtyping; 52 C. difficile-positive specimens, including 5 from Ward A, 33 from Ward C, and 14 from Ward D, failed in slpA subtyping.
For G. duodenalis, 6 and 11 multilocus sequence types belonging to AII and B were found, respectively; G. duodenalis AII-11 to AII-14, E. bieneusi SH1–12, and C. difficile fr-sh1–4, og39-sh1, sh-01, sh-02, xr-sh1 are new genotypes or subtypes found in this study.
Figure 2Phylogenetic relationship of multilocus sequence subtypes of Giardia duodenalis.
Sequences from this and a previous study [22] are included in the analysis. The relationship of multilocus sequence subtypes was inferred by a neighbor-joining analysis of concatenated sequences of the gdh, tpi, and bg fragments, based on the p-distance model. Bootstrap values >50% are shown. Novel and known genotypes identified in this study are indicated by black and white triangles, respectively.
Figure 3Phylogenetic relationship of Enterocytozoon bieneusi genotypes.
The relationship of genotypes identified in this study and some other genotypes in GenBank was inferred by a neighbor-joining analysis of ITS sequences, based on the p-distance model. Bootstrap values >50% are shown. Novel and known genotypes identified in this study are indicated by black and white triangles, respectively.
Figure 4Phylogenetic relationship of Clostridium difficile subtypes.
The relationship of subtypes identified in this study and other subtypes in a previous study [9] was inferred by a neighbor-joining analysis of slpA sequences, based on the p-distance model. Bootstrap values >50% are shown. Novel and known subtypes identified in this study are indicated by black and white triangles, respectively.