| Literature DB >> 24967226 |
Amin R Soliman1, Mohamed Momtaz Abd Elaziz1, Mona I El Lawindi2.
Abstract
Introduction. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Several studies demonstrated nosocomial transmission of HCV among HD patients. Aim. We aimed to evaluate the isolation program of HCV seropositive patients among a group of Egyptian haemodialysis patients to decrease the incidence of HCV seroconversion. Methods. One hundred and fourteen HCV seronegative patients who were receiving regular haemodialysis in different four haemodialysis units in Egypt. The first group included forty six patients on regular hemodialysis in two centers following strict isolation of the HCV seropositive patients, and the second group included sixty eight patients on regular hemodialysis in the other two centers not following this strict isolation. All these patients were followed up over a period of 36 months. Results. There was a significantly higher incidence of HCV seroconversion of patients on hemodialysis in units not following strict isolation of HCV seropositive patients (42.9%) than those on regular hemodialysis in units following strict isolation (14.8%). Conclusions. In HD units with a high prevalence of HCV+ patients, strict isolation of HCV+ patients in combination with implementation of universal prevention measures can limit the spread of HCV infection in HD patients.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 24967226 PMCID: PMC4045436 DOI: 10.5402/2013/395467
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Nephrol ISSN: 2314-405X
Incidence of seroconversion in both groups.
| Group 1 | Group 2 |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | % | No | % | ||
| Not Seroconverted | 23 | 85.2% | 32 | 57.1% | <0.05 |
| Seroconverted | 4 | 14.8% | 24 | 42.9% | |
Figure 1Incidences of seroconversion in both groups.
Comparison between demographic data of seroconverted and seroconverted patients.
| Total | Not seroconverted | Seroconverted | Incidence of seroconversion |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||||
| Male | 29 | 15 | 14 | 48.2% | >0.05 |
| Female | 27 | 17 | 10 | 37.1% | |
| Occupation | |||||
| No | 36 | 24 | 12 | 33.3% | >0.05 |
| Yes | 20 | 8 | 12 | 60.0% | |
| Marital status | |||||
| No | 6 | 4 | 2 | 33.3% | |
| Yes | 46 | 25 | 21 | 45.6% | >0.05 |
| Widow | 4 | 3 | 1 | 25.0% | |
| Education | |||||
| Not | 16 | 10 | 6 | 37.5% | |
| Primary | 22 | 11 | 11 | 50.0% | >0.05 |
| Secondary | 15 | 11 | 4 | 26.7% | |
| University | 3 | 0 | 3 | 100% | |
| Age (years) | 49.47 ± 15.5 | 52.29 ± 12.1 | >0.05 |
Comparison between not seroconverted and seroconverted patients according to risk factors.
| Not | Seroconverted |
| Odd's ratio | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | % | No | % | |||
| Isolation | ||||||
| With isolation (group 1) | 23 | 41.8% | 4 | 14.3% | <0.05 | 0.23 |
| Without isolation (group 2) | 32 | 58.2% | 24 | 85.7% | ||
| Duration of hemodialysis | ||||||
| 21 | 56.8% | 16 | 43.2% | <0.05 | 2.39 | |
| 35 | 76.1% | 11 | 23.9% | |||
| Hospitalization | ||||||
| No | 13 | 23.6% | 4 | 14.3% | >0.05 | 1.86 |
| Yes | 42 | 76.4% | 24 | 85.7% | ||
| Blood transfusion | ||||||
| No | 18 | 32.7% | 3 | 10.7% | <0.05 | 4.05 |
| Yes | 37 | 67.3% | 25 | 89.3% | ||
| Surgery | ||||||
| No | 18 | 0.0% | 11 | 3.6% | >0.05 | 1.03 |
| Yes | 36 | 100.0% | 17 | 96.4% | ||
| Tattooing | ||||||
| No | 51 | 92.7% | 26 | 92.9% | >0.05 | 0.98 |
| Yes | 4 | 7.3% | 2 | 7.1% | ||
| IV drug abuser | ||||||
| No | 55 | 100.0% | 25 | 89.3% | <0.05 | 1.1 |
| Yes | 0.0 | 0.0% | 3 | 10.7% | ||
Multivariate “regression” analysis of predictors for HCVAb seroconversion.
| Beta |
| Sig. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duration on hemodialysis | 0.433 | 4.57 | 0.001 |
| Isolation | −0.267 | −2.301 | 0.01 |
| Hospitalization | 0.119 | 1.037 | 0.303 |
| Blood Trans. | 0.082 | 0.692 | 0.426 |
| Surgery | 0.223 | 2.035 | 0.06 |
| Tattooing | 0.018 | 0.164 | 0.572 |
| I.V. drug users | 0.216 | 2.016 | 0.069 |