| Literature DB >> 31759244 |
Ander Burgaña1, Rosa Abellana2, Stanislav Zlatanov Yordanov1, Rabee Kazan1, A Mauricio Pérez Ortiz1, Cristina Castillo Ramos1, Christian Garavito Hernández1, Miriam Molina Rivero1, Alessandra Queiroga Gonçalves3, Emma Padilla4, Josefa Pérez4, Roger García-Puig5, Tomas M Perez-Porcuna6.
Abstract
Dientamoeba fragilis is a trichomonad parasite of the human intestine that is found worldwide. However, the biological cycle and transmission of this parasite have yet to be elucidated. Although its pathogenic capacity has been questioned, there is increasing evidence that clinical manifestations vary greatly. Different therapeutic options with antiparasitic drugs are currently available; however, very few studies have compared the effectiveness of these drugs. In the present longitudinal study, we evaluate 13,983 copro-parasitological studies using light microscopy of stools, during 2013-2015, in Terrassa, Barcelona (Spain). A total of 1150 (8.2%) presented D. fragilis. Of these, 739 episodes were finally analyzed: those that involved a follow-up parasitology test up to 3 months later, corresponding to 586 patients with gastrointestinal symptoms (53% under 15 years of age). Coinfection by Blastocystis hominis was present in 33.6% of the subjects. Our aim was to compare therapeutic responses to different antiparasitic drugs and the factors associated with the persistence of D. fragilis post-treatment. Gender, age, and other intestinal parasitic coinfections were not associated with parasite persistence following treatment. Metronidazole was the therapeutic option in most cases, followed by paromomycin: 65.4% and 17.5% respectively. Paromomycin was found to be more effective at eradicating parasitic infection than metronidazole (81.8% vs. 65.4%; p = 0.007), except in children under six years of age (p = 0.538). Although Dientamoeba fragilis mainly produces mild clinical manifestations, the high burden of infection means we require better understanding of its epidemiological cycle and pathogenicity, as well as adequate therapeutic guidelines in order to adapt medical care and policies to respond to this health problem.Entities:
Keywords: Clinical efficacy; Dientamoeba fragilis; Metronidazole; Parasites; Paromomycin; Therapy
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31759244 PMCID: PMC6880088 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpddr.2019.10.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Parasitol Drugs Drug Resist ISSN: 2211-3207 Impact factor: 4.077
Characteristics of the patients and D. fragilis episodes, coinfection and treatment.
| n (%) | |
|---|---|
| Gender: Female | 308 (52.6%) |
| Age (year) | 12 (IQR:6; 46) |
| Episodes >1 | 152 (25.9%) |
| | 248 (33,6%) |
| | 31 (4.2%) |
| | 4 (0.5%) |
| Metronidazole | 483 (65.4%) |
| Paromomycin | 129 (17.5%) |
| Others | 61 (8.3%) |
| Non-treatment | 66 (8.9%) |
| 250 (33.8%) | |
IQR: interquartile range.
Study variables related to persistence of D. fragilis.
| Variables | Persistence of | P value |
|---|---|---|
| 0.419 | ||
| Female | 122/376 (32.4%) | |
| Male | 128/363 (35.3%) | |
| 0.107 | ||
| ≤5 | 43/155 (27.7%) | |
| 6–14 | 92/242 (38.0%) | |
| ≥15 | 115/342 (33.6%) | |
| 0.182 | ||
| Yes | 92/248 (37.1%) | |
| No | 158/491 (32.2%) | |
| 0.176 | ||
| Yes | 7/31 (22.6%) | |
| No | 243/703 (34.3%) | |
| 0.584 | ||
| Yes | 1/4 (25.0%) | |
| No | 249/735 (33.9%) | |
| 0.012 | ||
| 0–30 | 49/179 (27.4%) | |
| 31–60 | 138/404 (34.2%) | |
| 61–90 | 63/156 (40.4%) | |
Factors associated with the eradication of D. fragilis.
| P- value | OR [95%CI] | |
|---|---|---|
| 0.834 | 1.04 [0.72; 1.46] | |
| ≤5 | 0.873 | 1.04 [0.65; 1.66] |
| 6-14 | 0.230 | 0.79 [0.54; 1.16] |
| Paromomiycin | <0.001 | 5.64 [2.51; 12.6] |
| Metronidazole | 0.002 | 1.84 [1.10; 3.08] |
| Others | 0.098 | 1.74 [0.90; 3.35] |
| 0.155 | 1.30 [0.91; 1.86] | |
| 0–30 | 0.091 | 1.61 [0.93; 2.78] |
| 31–60 | 0.639 | 1.11 [0.72; 1.68] |
Basal category; Age: ≥15, Treatment: Non-treatment, Time until test: 61–90 days.
Eradication rates of D. fragilis according to antiparasitic drug administered.
| Treatment | % |
|---|---|
| Metronidazole alone | 300/459 (65.4%) |
| Metronidazole + Mebendazole | 17/24 (70.8%) |
| Metronidazole (total) | 317/483 (65.6%) |
| Paromomycin alone | 99/121 (81.8%) |
| Paromomycin + Mebendazole | 7/8 (87.5%) |
| Paromomycin (total) | 106/129 (82.2%) |
| Paromomycin + Metronidazole | 7/8 (87.5%) |
| Tetracycline | 8/11 (72.7%) |
| Secnidazole | 0/2 (0%) |
| Tinidazole | 1/2 (50%) |
| Mebendazole | 9/20 (45%) |
| Clotrimoxazol | 3/6 (50%) |
| Non-treatment | 32/66 (48.5%) |
Percentage of D. fragilis eradication based on treatment and age group.
| Treatment | Age group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| ≤5 years | 6–14years | ≥15 years | |
| Metronidazole | 65/86 (75.6%) | 79/136 (58.1%) | 154/232 (66.5%) |
| Paromomycin | 28/39 (71.8%) | 37/44 (84.1%)* | 36/40 (90.0%)** |
| Others | 11/16 (68.8%) | 24/38 (63.2%) | 27/47 (57.4%) |
| Non-treatment | 8/14 (57.1%) | 101/24 (41.7%) | 10/23 (43.5%) |
| P-value | 0.538 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Significant differences between metronidazole and paromomycin *(p = 0.007) **(p = 0.011).
Test results post treatment with metronidazole according to dose used.
| Treatment | Negative for | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Metronidazole | Dose and duration recommended | 157/215 (73.0%) | |
| Duration<10 days | 71/110 (64.5%) | p = 0.199 | |
| Underdosage | 28/39 (71.8%) | p = 0.97 | |
| Duration<10 days and underdosage | 36/79 (45.6%) | p < 0,0001 |
CDC recommendation.