Detection of SEN virus in the general population and different risk groups in Slovakia
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
17004654
DOI
10.1007/bf02932126
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- chirurgie operační škodlivé účinky MeSH
- dialýza ledvin škodlivé účinky MeSH
- DNA virů analýza MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- infekce DNA virem epidemiologie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nemoci jater epidemiologie virologie MeSH
- neparametrická statistika MeSH
- polymerázová řetězová reakce MeSH
- potransfuzní reakce MeSH
- rizikové faktory MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Torque teno virus * genetika MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Slovenská republika epidemiologie MeSH
- Názvy látek
- DNA virů MeSH
Sera of 426 adult persons were examined to assess the prevalence of SEN virus (SENV) infection in Slovakia and to determine the importance of different risk factors for parenteral transmission. SENV prevalence was determined by the PCR method using primers of SENV-D and SENV-H strains. Positive results were found in 10 of 37 patients with acute hepatitis of unknown etiology, 7 of 38 with acute hepatitis B, 17 of 44 with chronic hepatitis B, 29 of 102 with chronic hepatitis C, 36 of 72 hemodialysis patients, 2 of 33 health care workers and 24 of 100 persons from the control group. The highest prevalence of SENV was among hemodialysis patients, significantly higher than in the groups of health care workers, acute hepatitis B and controls. The lowest prevalence was in health care workers group, significantly lower also in comparison with groups of chronic hepatitis B and C. Among the possible risk factors of virus transmission the average duration of hemodialysis (1.15 vs. 0.50 years), number of surgeries (1.60 vs. 1.10) and transfusions (1.34 vs. 0.94) showed notable differences in terms of SENV infection. Bilirubin and aminotransferase levels did not differ between SENV-positive and -negative groups. No pathogenetic role of SEN virus in liver injury was confirmed.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2004;49(6):635-64 PubMed
Semin Liver Dis. 1995 Feb;15(1):110-20 PubMed
J Infect Dis. 2002 Feb 1;185(3):389-92 PubMed
Intervirology. 2005;48(4):216-22 PubMed
World J Gastroenterol. 2004 Aug 15;10(16):2402-5 PubMed
J Clin Microbiol. 2002 Sep;40(9):3140-5 PubMed
Antiviral Res. 2003 Sep;60(1):27-33 PubMed
J Infect Dis. 2001 Feb 1;183(3):359-67 PubMed
Hepatology. 2001 May;33(5):1303-11 PubMed
Liver Transpl. 2001 Jun;7(6):521-5 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 Apr 11;92(8):3401-5 PubMed
Nat Med. 1995 Jun;1(6):564-9 PubMed
J Med Virol. 2002 Aug;67(4):624-9 PubMed
J Clin Virol. 2003 May;27(1):69-73 PubMed
N Engl J Med. 1992 Dec 31;327(27):1899-905 PubMed
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2003 Feb;18(2):348-52 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2003;48(3):399-402 PubMed
J Infect Dis. 2001 Nov 15;184(10):1246-51 PubMed
J Infect Dis. 2001 Nov 15;184(10):1315-9 PubMed
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1997 Dec 8;241(1):92-7 PubMed
J Med Virol. 2002 Mar;66(3):421-7 PubMed
J Infect Dis. 2001 Aug 15;184(4):400-4 PubMed
