| Literature DB >> 30364393 |
Albert Picado1, Israel Cruz1, Maël Redard-Jacot1, Alejandro G Schijman2, Faustino Torrico3,4, Sergio Sosa-Estani5,6, Zachary Katz1, Joseph Mathu Ndung'u1.
Abstract
It is estimated that between 8000 and 15 000 Trypanosoma cruzi infected babies are born every year to infected mothers in Chagas disease endemic countries. Currently, poor access to and performance of the current diagnostic algorithm, based on microscopy at birth and serology at 8-12 months after delivery, is one of the barriers to congenital Chagas disease (CCD) control. Detection of parasite DNA using molecular diagnostic tools could be an alternative or complement to current diagnostic methods, but its implementation in endemic regions remains limited. Prompt diagnosis and treatment of CCD cases would have a positive clinical and epidemiological impact. In this paper, we analysed the burden of CCD in Latin America, and the potential use of molecular tests to improve access to early diagnosis and treatment of T. cruzi infected newborns.Entities:
Keywords: LAMP; PCR; Trypanosoma cruzi; chagas disease; molecular tools
Year: 2018 PMID: 30364393 PMCID: PMC6195131 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001069
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Glob Health ISSN: 2059-7908
Estimated number of infants born to T. cruzi-infected mothers and number of congenital Chagas disease cases in 2010 in endemic countries
| Countries | Population* | Range of | Range of population infected | Range of women of childbearing age infected | Range of children born from | Range of congenital cases‡ |
| Argentina | 41 343 000 | 2.20%–4.13% | 909 546–1 707 466 | 200 158–375 751 | 22 894–42 894 | 1142–2145 |
| Belize | 315 000 | 0.30%–0.74% | 945–2331 | 222–547 | 34–83 | 2–4 |
| Bolivia | 9 947 000 | 6.10%–18.00% | 606 767–1 790 460 | 144 198–425 504 | 23 609–70 551 | 1195–3528 |
| Brazil | 190 755 799 | 0.60%–1.02% | 1 144 535–1 945 709 | 284 883–484 301 | 26 622–45 257 | 1331–2263 |
| Chile | 17 095 000 | 0.70%–1.00% | 119 665–170 950 | 27 088–38 697 | 2654–3792 | 133–190 |
| Colombia | 45 805 000 | 0.50%–0.96% | 229 025–439 728 | 52 828–101 430 | 6864–13 179 | 343–659 |
| Costa Rica | 4 516 000 | 0.17%–0.53% | 7677–23 935 | 1887–5882 | 194–606 | 10–30 |
| Ecuador | 14 483 499 | 0.40%–1.74% | 57 934–252 013 | 14 134–61 485 | 1664–7238 | 83–362 |
| El Salvador | 6 952 000 | 1.30%–3.70% | 90 376–257 224 | 19 472–55 420 | 2436–6932 | 122–347 |
| Guatemala | 13 550 000 | 1.20%–1.98% | 162 600–268 290 | 38 058–62 796 | 8275–13 653 | 414–683 |
| French Guyana, Gayana Surinam | 1 501 962 | 0.80%–1.29% | 12 016–19 375 | 2386–3848 | 67–108 | 3–5 |
| Honduras | 7 989 000 | 0.92%–4.20% | 73 499–335 538 | 17 191–78 481 | 2799–12 776 | 140–639 |
| Mexico | 112 468 855 | 0.78%–1.50% | 877 257–1 687 033 | 2 17 759–4 18 768 | 23 323–44 852 | 1166–2243 |
| Nicaragua | 5 604 000 | 0.52%–4.60% | 29 141–257 784 | 7552–66 804 | 1096–9695 | 55–485 |
| Panama | 3 557 687 | 0.01%–0.52% | 356–18 500 | 79–4089 | 10–545 | 1–27 |
| Paraguay | 8 668 000 | 2.13%–5.50% | 184 628–476 740 | 32 938–85 050 | 4927–12 722 | 246–636 |
| Peru | 28 948 000 | 0.44%–0.69% | 127 371–199 741 | 31 282–49 056 | 3966–6219 | 198–311 |
| Uruguay | 3 301 000 | 0.24%–0.80% | 7922–26 408 | 1684–5612 | 179–595 | 9–30 |
| Venezuela | 27 223 000 | 0.71%–1.16% | 193 283–315 787 | 48 532–79 292 | 6393–10 445 | 320–522 |
| Latin America | 544 023 802 | 1.07%–1.45% | 5 821 055–7 888 345 | 1 404 704–1 903 571 | 157 972–214 074 | 7899–10 704 |
*Population figures per country accordingly to the U.S. Census Bureau 2010.
†Prevalence range of T. cruzi infection as described.22 27 28
‡Estimated range of congenital cases per country as reported by Howard et al.25
T. cruzi, Trypanosoma cruzi.
Figure 1Estimated number of infants born to T. cruzi-infected mothers who should have been tested for congenital Chagas disease in 2010 in Latin American countries. The minimum and maximum number of babies that would need to be tested per country are presented. The estimates are presented in detail in table 1.
Number of pregnant women screened, babies tested and CCD cases identified by Bolivia’s national control programme in 2009, and the estimated number of CCD cases missed due to inadequate coverage
| Variable | Estimates | Source |
|
| ||
| # of pregnant women screened | 112 160 | Tables 5–8 |
| # of pregnant women who are also seropositive | 24 748 | Tables 5–8 |
| Seroprevalence in pregnant women | 22% | Calculated: 24 748/112 160 |
|
| ||
| # of babies tested | 16 185 | Tables 5–8 |
| # of babies not tested (assuming one baby per pregnancy) | 8563 | Calculated: 24 748–16 185 |
| % babies tested following the diagnostic algorithm | 65% | Calculated: 16 185/24 748 |
|
| ||
| # CCD cases identified | 329 | Tables 5–8 |
| Rate of congenital transmission | 2% | Calculated: 329/16 185 |
| # of CCD cases missed because babies were not tested | 174 | Calculated: 2%x8563 |
CCD, congenital Chagas disease.