-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Measles in Czech population with varying vaccination rates in 2018-2019: clinical and laboratory differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals and their relevance to clinical practice
D. Smíšková, S. Janovic, P. Kadeřávková, L. Nováková, Z. Blechová, M. Malý, R. Limberková
Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
- MeSH
- dítě MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- imunoglobulin G krev MeSH
- imunoglobulin M * krev MeSH
- kojenec MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- předškolní dítě MeSH
- protilátky virové krev MeSH
- spalničková vakcína * aplikace a dávkování imunologie MeSH
- spalničky * prevence a kontrola imunologie MeSH
- vakcinace * statistika a číselné údaje MeSH
- Check Tag
- dítě MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- kojenec MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- předškolní dítě MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Česká republika MeSH
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In a highly vaccinated population, an increasing number of previously vaccinated measles cases can be expected. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of vaccination on the clinical course and immune response in relation to the current measles case definition. METHODS: The presence of fever, catarrhal symptoms, exanthema and complications, and specific IgM and IgG positivity were assessed in all 230 patients and compared in 193 patients with known vaccination status, divided into measles-containing vaccine (MCV) groups: MCV0 (85 patients), MCV1 (25 patients) and MCV2 (83 patients). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between groups were found for catarrhal symptoms. Conjunctivitis and rhinitis were significantly less frequent in the MCV2 group (47% and 54%) compared to MCV0 (80% and 80%), p < 0.001 and p = 0.002 respectively. Typical exanthema was present in 74 (87%) MCV0 and 56 (67%) MCV2 patients, p = 0.005. Complications were most common in the MCV0 group (29%). ECDC clinical case criteria were met in 81 (95%) MCV0, 18 (72%) MCV1 and 59 (71%) MCV2 patients, p < 0.001. IgM were positive in 64 (83%) MCV0, 14 (74%) MCV1 and 36 (67%) MCV2 patients, differences were not statistically significant. There were highly significant differences in IgG between MCV0 and both vaccinated groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A redefinition of the clinical case classification is essential to better capture modified measles and to raise awareness among healthcare workers of the differences in measles in vaccinated patients.
Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology National Institute of Public Health Prague Czech Republic
Department of Biostatistics National Institute of Public Health Prague Czech Republic
Department of Infectious Diseases University Hospital Bulovka Prague Czech Republic
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24019600
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20241024110615.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 241015s2024 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1080/23744235.2024.2339870 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)38613412
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Smíšková, Dita $u Department of Infectious Diseases, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Bulovka University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000156996474 $7 xx0139471
- 245 10
- $a Measles in Czech population with varying vaccination rates in 2018-2019: clinical and laboratory differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals and their relevance to clinical practice / $c D. Smíšková, S. Janovic, P. Kadeřávková, L. Nováková, Z. Blechová, M. Malý, R. Limberková
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In a highly vaccinated population, an increasing number of previously vaccinated measles cases can be expected. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of vaccination on the clinical course and immune response in relation to the current measles case definition. METHODS: The presence of fever, catarrhal symptoms, exanthema and complications, and specific IgM and IgG positivity were assessed in all 230 patients and compared in 193 patients with known vaccination status, divided into measles-containing vaccine (MCV) groups: MCV0 (85 patients), MCV1 (25 patients) and MCV2 (83 patients). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between groups were found for catarrhal symptoms. Conjunctivitis and rhinitis were significantly less frequent in the MCV2 group (47% and 54%) compared to MCV0 (80% and 80%), p < 0.001 and p = 0.002 respectively. Typical exanthema was present in 74 (87%) MCV0 and 56 (67%) MCV2 patients, p = 0.005. Complications were most common in the MCV0 group (29%). ECDC clinical case criteria were met in 81 (95%) MCV0, 18 (72%) MCV1 and 59 (71%) MCV2 patients, p < 0.001. IgM were positive in 64 (83%) MCV0, 14 (74%) MCV1 and 36 (67%) MCV2 patients, differences were not statistically significant. There were highly significant differences in IgG between MCV0 and both vaccinated groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A redefinition of the clinical case classification is essential to better capture modified measles and to raise awareness among healthcare workers of the differences in measles in vaccinated patients.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a spalničky $x prevence a kontrola $x imunologie $7 D008457
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 12
- $a spalničková vakcína $x aplikace a dávkování $x imunologie $7 D008458
- 650 _2
- $a předškolní dítě $7 D002675
- 650 12
- $a vakcinace $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D014611
- 650 _2
- $a dítě $7 D002648
- 650 12
- $a imunoglobulin M $x krev $7 D007075
- 650 _2
- $a mladiství $7 D000293
- 650 _2
- $a imunoglobulin G $x krev $7 D007074
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a kojenec $7 D007223
- 650 _2
- $a protilátky virové $x krev $7 D000914
- 650 _2
- $a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
- 651 _2
- $a Česká republika $x epidemiologie $7 D018153
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Janovic, Simona $u Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kadeřávková, Pavlína $u Department of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Bulovka, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Nováková, Ludmila $u Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Blechová, Zuzana $u Department of Infectious Diseases, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Bulovka University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Malý, Marek $u Department of Biostatistics, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Limberková, Radomíra $u Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology, National Institute of Public Health, Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00191578 $t Infectious diseases (London, England) $x 2374-4243 $g Roč. 56, č. 8 (2024), s. 616-623
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38613412 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20241015 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20241024110609 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2202061 $s 1231573
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 56 $c 8 $d 616-623 $e 20240413 $i 2374-4243 $m Infectious diseases (London, England) $n Infect Dis (Lond) $x MED00191578
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20241015