| Literature DB >> 35584508 |
Maria Aparecida Shikanai Yasuda1,2,3.
Abstract
This review aims to update and discuss the main challenges in controlling emergent and reemergent forms of Trypanosoma cruzi transmission through organ transplantation, blood products and vertical transmission in endemic and non-endemic areas as well as emergent forms of transmission in endemic countries through contaminated food, currently representing the major cause of acute illness in several countries. As a neglected tropical disease potentially controllable with a major impact on morbimortality and socioeconomic aspects, Chagas disease (CD) was approved at the WHO global plan to interrupt four transmission routes by 2030 (vector/blood transfusion/organ transplant/congenital). Implementation of universal or target screening for CD are highly recommended in blood banks of non-endemic regions; in organ transplants donors in endemic/non-endemic areas as well as in women at risk from endemic areas (reproductive age women/pregnant women-respective babies). Moreover, main challenges for surveillance are the application of molecular methods for identification of infected babies, donor transmitted infection and of live parasites in the food. In addition, the systematic recording of acute/non-acute cases and transmission sources is crucial to establish databases for control and surveillance purposes. Remarkably, antiparasitic treatment of infected reproductive age women and infected babies is essential for the elimination of congenital CD by 2030.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35584508 PMCID: PMC9113729 DOI: 10.1590/0074-02760210033
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz ISSN: 0074-0276 Impact factor: 2.747
Distribution of Trypanosoma cruzi infected people and reproductive age women and estimates of vectorial, maternofetal transmission, and prevalence in blood bank candidates in regions of endemicity
| Country |
| Annual number of vectorial transmissions | Annual number of congenital infections | Number of 15-44-year-old women | Prevalence (%) in the blood bank candidates |
| Argentina | 1,505,235 | 1,078 | 1,457 | 211,102 | 3.13 |
| Bolivia | 607,186 | 8,087 | 616 | 199,351 | 2.32 |
| Brazil | 1,156,821 | 46 | 571
| 119,298 | 0.18 |
| Chile | 119,660 | 0 | 115 | 11,171 | 0.16 |
| Colombia | 437,960 | 5,274 | 1046 | 116,221 | 0.41 |
| Costa Rica | 7,667 | 10 | 61 | 1,728 | 0.045 |
| Ecuador | 199,872 | 2,042 | 696 | 62, 898 | 0.19 |
| El Salvador | 90,222 | 972 | 234 | 18,211 | 1.610 |
| Guatemala | 166,667 | 1,275 | 164 | 32,759 | 1.34 |
| French Guiana-Suriname | 12,600 | 280 | 18 | 3,818 | NA |
| Honduras | 73,333 | 933 | 257 | 16,149 | 0.126 |
| Mexico | 876,458 | 6,135 | 1,788 | 185,600 | 0.089 |
| Nicaragua | 29,300 | 383 | 138 | 5,822 | 0.124 |
| Panama | 18,337 | 175 | 40 | 6,332 | 0.056 |
| Paraguay | 184,669 | 297 | 525 | 63,385 | 0.34 |
| Peru | 127,282 | 2,055 | 232 | 28,132 | 0.038 |
| Uruguay | 7,852 | 0 | 2 | 1,858 | 0.040 |
| Venezuela | 193,339 | 873 | 665 | 40,223 | 0.110 |
| Subtotal | 5,742,167 | 29,925 | 8,668 | 1,124,930 | 0.089 |
a: Source: WHO ; b: add more 543 RN from Bolivian immigrants in Brazil, according to the estimates of Luna et al.
Distribution of Trypanosoma cruzi infected people in regions of non-endemicity and estimates of annual number of congenital infections, of infected pregnant women and prevalence in blood bank candidates
| Country |
| Infected people | Annual number of congenital infections(26) | Infected pregnant women(26) | Prevalence (%) in blood bank Angheben et al.(8) |
| Strasen et al.(17) | Basile et al.
| ||||
| Spain | 75,358.53 | 47,984-86,618 | 16-162 | 1,125-2,226 | 1/218 |
| Italy | 9,200.20 | 6,464-12,036 | 1-6 | 55-76 | 3.9/100 |
| Germany | 2,007.97 | 1,123-1,481 | NR | NR | |
| France | 2,065.98 | 2,148-2,823 | 1-5 | 53-74 | 1/32,800 |
| Netherlands | 1,885.73 | 967-1,773 | NR | NR | |
| Portugal | 1,548.96 | 1,255 | 1-3 | 40 | |
| United Kingdom | 1,507.22 | 6,111-12,201 | 58-84 | 54-84 | 1/12,861 |
| Sweden | 1,302.64 | ||||
| Switzerland | 1,171.48 | 1,584-3,971 | 0-1 | 6-8 | |
| Belgium | 683-921 | 683-921 | 0-1 | 10-13 | |
| Europe | 97,556 | 68,318-123,078 | 20-184e | 1,347-2,521 | |
| US | 238,091(16) - 326,000 | 1/27,500 | |||
| Canada | 100,000(8) | 3.1/105 | |||
| Japan | 4,000(10) | ||||
| Australia | 1,928(27) | 0.04%
| |||
| New Zealand | 82(27) |
a: high underdiagnosis index, estimated to be in Europe between 89% and 99% of expected cases(26); b: Australian Red Blood Service, 2010 - No systematic screening.
Health policy for blood donations (transplantation) and year of implementation
| Universal screening | Screening (at risk donors)
| Deferral (at risk donors) | Exclusion (infected donors) | No specific measures | Transfusion transmission | |
| US | X | X | ||||
| Canada | X | X | ||||
| UK | X (X) | |||||
| Spain | (X) | X (X) | X | |||
| France | (X) | X | ||||
| Switzerland | X | |||||
| Italy | in process 2014 (X) | |||||
| Belgium | X | |||||
| Portugal | No available
| X (X) | ||||
| Sweden | X | X
| ||||
| Other European countries | X (X) EU guidelines | X
| ||||
| Australia/New Zealand | X
| X | ||||
| Japan | X | |||||
| China | X |
a: (X) - in parenthesis - refers to transplantation; b: at risk: born in endemic regions, or born to mothers native of endemic regions, or recipients of blood transfusions in endemic regions. Canada and US include persons who lived at least 6 months or 3 months, respectively, in endemic areas and Council of Europe (Guide to the preparation, use and quality assurance of blood components-20th edition, 2020 and Guide to the quality and safety of Organs for transplantation 7th Edition, 2018) recommends at risk donors screening; c: 2015 - No available data; d: exclusion of at risk donors who lived more than five years in Chagas disease endemic countries (no information about those exposed and not tested yet); e: other European countries follow European Commission’s directives 2004/33/CE and 2006/17/CE, 2018/7th Ed/ CE; f: epidemiological form excludes at risk candidates; no screening test for at risk donors and blood derivates are only prepared if serology had been negative.(27)

Algorithm for Trypanosoma cruzi infected donor and transplant recipient.
Donor derived infection by kidney, liver, heart and hematopoietic stem cell transplants
| Authors kidney | Donor + (N)
| % infected organ /total receptor
| Diagnosis | Infection diagnosis: weeks | Follow up
| Prophylaxis | Death
|
| Chocair(33) 1981, BR | 4 | Case series | Buffy coat
| 4,12,16,62 | No reported | No | No |
| Figueiredo(42) 1990, BR | 1 | Case report | Microscopy
| 22 | 21 | No | No |
| Cantarovich(43) 1992, ARG | 26 | 3/26 | Parasitaemia/clinical | 2,6.5,35 | “long term evolution” | No | No |
| Riarte(11) 1981 ARG | 16 | 3/16 | Strout, culture | 5, 8, 23 | 12-60 | No | No |
| De Arteaga(44) 1992, ARG | 6 cadaveric 1 live | 0/7 | Parasitaemia, serology | Non detected | Non accessible | No | No |
| Vásquez(45) 1992, ARG | 8 cadaveric 1 live | 2/9 | Strout, micro-haematocrit, serology
| 5-9 | 4
| No | Noc |
| Sousa(46) 2009, BR | 9+ Serology | 0/9 | Serology
| Non detected | 3
| Recipient 14 days BNZ PT | No |
| Huprikar(35) 2013, US | 10 patients (17 organs) | 3/17 (1†KP) | Clinical/blood culture /PCR | 5,7, 17 | 1.8
| No | 1 Kidney pancreas |
| Cura(47) 2013, ARG | 1+/4 | 1/4 (0 KP) | PCR, strout, serology | 13 | 14-30 | No | No |
| Cicora(48) 2017, ARG | 6+/73 (8.2%) | 0/6 | Thick-blood
| No | 7ɫ-60 | Donors 30days BNZ pre-transplant | No |
| Total Kidney Prophylaxis No Prophylaxis | 12/93=12.9% 0b/15 = 0% 12/78 = 15.5% | Prophylaxis: 6 donors and 9 recipients | |||||
| Authors liver | Infected donor | % infected organ /total receptor
| Diagnosis | Infection diagnosis: weeks | Follow up
| Prophylaxis | Death
|
| D´Albuquerque(49) 2007, BR | 4 | 0/4 | Serology
| Non detected | 12
| BNZ PT | No |
| Salvador(50) 2011, Spain | 2 | 1+
| PCR/serology | 8-36 Elisa + | 8
| BNZ PT | 0 |
| Goldaracena(51) 2012 ARG | 1 HIV | 0 case report | Strout, PCR, serology | Non detected | 2
| No | No |
| McCormack(52) 2012, US | 9 | 2/9= 22% | Parasitaemia Strout | 12-16 | 15
| No | No |
| Huprikar(35) 2013, US | 12 | 2/11 = 22% No prophylaxis 0/1 Prophylaxis | Clinical/PCR/ blood culture | 8, 12 | 2
| 9 No 1 Yes BNZ PT | No |
| Cura
| 3 | 3/3 | PCR, strout, serology | 5, 6, 14 | 17-23 | No | No |
| Rodrigues-Guardado(53) 2015, ARG | 1 | 0 case report | Serology micro-haematocrit, PCR | 44 | 64 | No | No |
| Beldarramo(54) 2017, ARG | 4+/102 (3.92%) | 0/4 | qPCR | Non detected | Median: 54 | No | No |
| Total liver Prophylaxis No prophylaxis e | 8/34 = 23.5% 1/7 = 14.3% 7/27 = 25.9% | Prophylaxis 7 receptors | |||||
| Authors lung | Donor + (N) | % infected organ /total receptor
| Diagnosis | Infection diagnosis: weeks | Follow up (months)
| Prophylaxis | Death
|
| Cura(47) 2013, ARG | 1 | 1/1 | Strout, PCR | 10 | 8 | No | No |
| Huprikar(35) 2013, US | 1 | Bilateral lung | PCR, blood culture, serology | 29 | 7 | No | No |
| Salvador(50) Spain, 2017 | 1 | 0/1 | qPCR, serology | Non detected | 11 | BNZ PT | No |
| Authors heart | Donor + (N)a | % infected organ /total receptor
| Diagnosis | Infection diagnosis: weeks | Follow up (months)
| Prophylaxis | Death
|
| Huprikar(35) 2013, US | 3+/4
| 3/4 | Smear, PCR, blood culture, serology | 3,7,9 | 2, 7, 9 | No | 1 |
| Allogeneic SCT author | Donor + (N)
| % infected organ /total receptor
| Diagnosis | Infection diagnosis: weeks | Follow up (months) | Prophylaxis | Death
|
| Altclas(34) 2011, ARG | 3 | 0/4 | 0 (strout, parasitology, serology) | Non detected | 3, 4, 11 | No-1 patient 2 BNZ-30 d | No |
BR: Brazil,: ARG: Argentina; BNZ PT: benznidazole in the immediate post-transplant period for 60 days, except when indicated; a: comparative infection rates only for cases’ series with post-transplant follow-up period; b: control of antiparasitic treatment in transplants need to be extended up to 24 months by parasitological methods or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) repeatedly together serology. c: deaths related only to Chagas disease (CD); d: PCR or parasitological tests for chronic CD were not employed for diagnosis of chronic CD after 3 months; e: positive serology means chronic CD even though asymptomatic; f: a 4th recipient from a non-immigrant donor with inconclusive serology (Elisa + by commercial tests and negative by IFA at CDC) did not have detectable anti-T. cruzi antibodies after the transplant, but donor infection could not be proved.
Orally transmitted acute Chagas disease: number of people possibly involved, suspected food, triatomines reservoirs, and cause of death
| Region urban/rural | Suspected food | No †/Total | Infected triatomines | Infected reservoirs | Cause of death | First author, year |
| Teutônia-Rio Grande do Sul, BR, rural, 1965 | Shared meal | 6/17 |
|
| Acute myocarditis | Silva(130) 1968 |
| Belém, Pará, BR, urban, 1968 | Shared meal | 1/4 | NR
| NR | Sudden death | Shaw(131) 1969 |
| Catolé do Rocha, Paraíba, BR, rural, 1986 | Shared sugar cane juice | 1/26
| Triatomine: peri-domicile |
| Myocarditis | Shikanai-Yasuda(129) 1991 |
| Abaetetuba-Pará, BR, periurban, 1998 | Shared açai paste/juice | 0/13 | NR | NR | NR | Pinto(132) 2001 |
| Navegantes, Santa Catarina, BR, periurban,2005 | Sugar cane juice | 3/25 |
| Opossums | Heart failure; digestive bleeding | Health Ministry Brazil(123) 2005 |
| Pará, BR, urban/rural,1988-2005 | Açaí, regional fruits paste/juice | 2/12 ?
| Triatomines peridomicile | NR for outbreaks | Myocarditis, digestive bleeding | Pinto(133) 2008 |
| Breves-Bagre, Pará, BR, urban, 2007 | Shared food | 0/27 | Not found | NR | NR | Beltrão(134) 2009 |
| Macaúbas, Bahia, BR, small town, 2006 | Shared water or beverage | 2/7 |
| Opossums | Heart failure | Dias(135) 2008 |
| Barcarena, Pará, urban, 2006 | Shared açai paste/juice | 0/11 | Not found 90 days later | NR | NR | Nobrega(136) 2009 |
| Redenção, Ceará, BR, rural, 2006 | Shared soup with fresh herbs | 0/8 |
| marsupials/rodents | NR | Cavalcanti(137)2009 |
| Lebrija, Santander Colômbia, 2008 | Shared orange or tangerine juice? | 2/10 | No infected | marsupials No infected | Acute myocarditis | Hernandez(118) 2009 |
| Caracas-Venezuela, urban, 2007 | Shared guava juice | 1/103
| Triatomine | No infected rodent | Acute myocarditis | Noya(119)2010 |
| Ibipitanga, Bahia, BR, rural, 2010 | Sugar cane juice | 0/6 |
| NR | NR | Bastos(138)2010 |
| Marcelino Vieira, Rio Grande do Norte, BR, rural, 2016 | Sugar cane juice | 3/18 |
| NR | NR | Vargas(139) 2018 |
| Lábrea, Amazonas, BR, small town, 2017(139) | Açaí pulp | NR/10 | NR | NR | NR | Santana(140) 2019 |
†: deaths; a: modified from Shikanai-Yasuda and Carvalho.(20); b: NR - no report; c: a second febrile patient died of unknown cause. d: death rate of cases transmitted orally has not been described; e: total number unknown (no information on Rheumatoid Factor absorption for IgM anti-T. cruzi test).
Proposed criteria for case definition in oral transmission of Chagas disease
| Case definition | Micro haematocrit, strout, buffy coat fresh exams, stained smears, and thick drop
| More than 1 case | PCR
| Immunological criteria IgG increase/IgM
| Clinical features without chagoma | Parasite in the food
| Relation with contaminated food | Other causes | Link to other case |
| Confirmed | + direct microscopy | X | X | X | X | X | X | No | X |
| Probable | X | X | X | X | X | No | - | No | X |
| Suspected | No | X | - | - | X | No | - | No | X |
a: presence of DNA is considered similarly to positivity of indirect parasitological methods in previously non immune (non infected patient. As DNA copies of fragments and enrichment parasitological methods are positive in chronic cases, a positive result of qualitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is valid for confirmation of only previously non infected cases. Quantitative PCR with a high number of copies not seen in chronic cases is more helpful to distinguish acute Chagas disease (ACD) from chronic CD; b: presence of live parasite in the suspected food by any method fills the criteria for proved case c and was firstly described by Santana et al;(140) c: concentration methods (strout, microhematocrit and buffy coat) are more sensitive than fresh exams or stained smears; d: IgM antibody is not reliable d due to the lack of accessible reliable reagents, particularly reliable positive controls, and the presence of false positive results due to IgM anti IgG antibodies not easily detectable in commercial kits.