2021 年与 2017 年比利时从人类身上采集的蜱虫中病原体的流行情况。

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 PARASITOLOGY Parasites & Vectors Pub Date : 2024-09-05 DOI:10.1186/s13071-024-06427-x
Camille Philippe, Laurence Geebelen, Marie R G Hermy, François E Dufrasne, Katrien Tersago, Alessandro Pellegrino, Manoj Fonville, Hein Sprong, Marcella Mori, Tinne Lernout
{"title":"2021 年与 2017 年比利时从人类身上采集的蜱虫中病原体的流行情况。","authors":"Camille Philippe, Laurence Geebelen, Marie R G Hermy, François E Dufrasne, Katrien Tersago, Alessandro Pellegrino, Manoj Fonville, Hein Sprong, Marcella Mori, Tinne Lernout","doi":"10.1186/s13071-024-06427-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ticks carry a variety of microorganisms, some of which are pathogenic to humans. The human risk of tick-borne diseases depends on, among others, the prevalence of pathogens in ticks biting humans. To follow-up on this prevalence over time, a Belgian study from 2017 was repeated in 2021.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>During the tick season 2021, citizens were invited to have ticks removed from their skin, send them and fill in a short questionnaire on an existing citizen science platform for the notification of tick bites (TekenNet). Ticks were morphologically identified to species and life stage level and screened using multiplex qPCR targeting, among others, Borrelia burgdorferi (sensu lato), Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia miyamotoi, Neoehrlichia mikurensis, Babesia spp., Rickettsia helvetica and tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV). The same methodology as in 2017 was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2021, the same tick species as in 2017 were identified in similar proportions; of 1094 ticks, 98.7% were Ixodes ricinus, 0.8% Ixodes hexagonus and 0.5% Dermacentor reticulatus. A total of 928 nymphs and adults could be screened for the presence of pathogens. Borrelia burgdorferi (s.l.) was detected in 9.9% (95% CI 8.2-12.0%), which is significantly lower than the prevalence of 13.9% (95% CI 12.2-15.7%) in 2017 (P = 0.004). The prevalences of A. phagocytophilum (4.7%; 95% CI 3.5-6.3%) and R. helvetica (13.3%; 95% CI 11.2-15.6%) in 2021 were significantly higher compared to 2017 (1.8%; 95% CI 1.3-2.7% and 6.8%; 95% CI 5.6-8.2% respectively) (P < 0.001 for both). For the other pathogens tested, no statistical differences compared to 2017 were found, with prevalences ranging between 1.5 and 2.9% in 2021. Rickettsia raoultii was again found in D. reticulatus ticks (n = 3/5 in 2021). Similar to 2017, no TBEV was detected in the ticks. Co-infections were found in 5.1% of ticks. When combining co-infection occurrence in 2017 and 2021, a positive correlation was observed between B. burgdorferi (s.l.) and N. mikurensis and B. burgdorferi (s.l.) and B. miyamotoi (P < 0.001 for both).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the 2021 prevalences fell within expectations, differences were found compared to 2017. Further research to understand the explanations behind these differences is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":19793,"journal":{"name":"Parasites & Vectors","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378490/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The prevalence of pathogens in ticks collected from humans in Belgium, 2021, versus 2017.\",\"authors\":\"Camille Philippe, Laurence Geebelen, Marie R G Hermy, François E Dufrasne, Katrien Tersago, Alessandro Pellegrino, Manoj Fonville, Hein Sprong, Marcella Mori, Tinne Lernout\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13071-024-06427-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ticks carry a variety of microorganisms, some of which are pathogenic to humans. The human risk of tick-borne diseases depends on, among others, the prevalence of pathogens in ticks biting humans. To follow-up on this prevalence over time, a Belgian study from 2017 was repeated in 2021.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>During the tick season 2021, citizens were invited to have ticks removed from their skin, send them and fill in a short questionnaire on an existing citizen science platform for the notification of tick bites (TekenNet). Ticks were morphologically identified to species and life stage level and screened using multiplex qPCR targeting, among others, Borrelia burgdorferi (sensu lato), Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia miyamotoi, Neoehrlichia mikurensis, Babesia spp., Rickettsia helvetica and tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV). The same methodology as in 2017 was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2021, the same tick species as in 2017 were identified in similar proportions; of 1094 ticks, 98.7% were Ixodes ricinus, 0.8% Ixodes hexagonus and 0.5% Dermacentor reticulatus. A total of 928 nymphs and adults could be screened for the presence of pathogens. Borrelia burgdorferi (s.l.) was detected in 9.9% (95% CI 8.2-12.0%), which is significantly lower than the prevalence of 13.9% (95% CI 12.2-15.7%) in 2017 (P = 0.004). The prevalences of A. phagocytophilum (4.7%; 95% CI 3.5-6.3%) and R. helvetica (13.3%; 95% CI 11.2-15.6%) in 2021 were significantly higher compared to 2017 (1.8%; 95% CI 1.3-2.7% and 6.8%; 95% CI 5.6-8.2% respectively) (P < 0.001 for both). For the other pathogens tested, no statistical differences compared to 2017 were found, with prevalences ranging between 1.5 and 2.9% in 2021. Rickettsia raoultii was again found in D. reticulatus ticks (n = 3/5 in 2021). Similar to 2017, no TBEV was detected in the ticks. Co-infections were found in 5.1% of ticks. When combining co-infection occurrence in 2017 and 2021, a positive correlation was observed between B. burgdorferi (s.l.) and N. mikurensis and B. burgdorferi (s.l.) and B. miyamotoi (P < 0.001 for both).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the 2021 prevalences fell within expectations, differences were found compared to 2017. Further research to understand the explanations behind these differences is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Parasites & Vectors\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378490/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Parasites & Vectors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-024-06427-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PARASITOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parasites & Vectors","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-024-06427-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PARASITOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:蜱虫携带多种微生物,其中一些对人类具有致病性。人类罹患蜱媒疾病的风险主要取决于叮咬人类的蜱虫中病原体的流行程度。为了长期跟踪这一流行情况,比利时在 2021 年重复了 2017 年的一项研究:方法:在 2021 年蜱虫季节,邀请市民将蜱虫从皮肤上取下,寄给现有的蜱虫叮咬通报公民科学平台(TekenNet)并填写一份简短的调查问卷。对蜱虫进行形态学鉴定,以确定其种类和生命阶段,并使用多重 qPCR 进行筛查,其中包括勃氏包柔氏菌(普通型)、噬胞嗜酸无形体、宫本包柔氏菌、米库雷氏新埃希氏菌、巴贝丝菌属、螺旋立克次体和蜱传脑炎病毒(TBEV)。结果与 2017 年的方法相同:2021 年发现的蜱虫种类与 2017 年相似;在 1094 只蜱虫中,98.7% 为蓖麻弓形虫,0.8% 为六角弓形虫,0.5% 为网斑蜱。共对 928 只若虫和成虫进行了病原体筛查。在9.9%(95% CI 8.2-12.0%)的若虫和成虫中检测到了布氏杆菌(s.l.),明显低于2017年13.9%(95% CI 12.2-15.7%)的流行率(P = 0.004)。与 2017 年(分别为 1.8%;95% CI 1.3-2.7% 和 6.8%;95% CI 5.6-8.2%)相比,2021 年噬菌体(4.7%;95% CI 3.5-6.3%)和螺旋体(13.3%;95% CI 11.2-15.6%)的流行率明显较高(P 结论:尽管 2021 年的患病率在预期范围内,但与 2017 年相比仍存在差异。需要进一步研究以了解这些差异背后的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The prevalence of pathogens in ticks collected from humans in Belgium, 2021, versus 2017.

Background: Ticks carry a variety of microorganisms, some of which are pathogenic to humans. The human risk of tick-borne diseases depends on, among others, the prevalence of pathogens in ticks biting humans. To follow-up on this prevalence over time, a Belgian study from 2017 was repeated in 2021.

Methods: During the tick season 2021, citizens were invited to have ticks removed from their skin, send them and fill in a short questionnaire on an existing citizen science platform for the notification of tick bites (TekenNet). Ticks were morphologically identified to species and life stage level and screened using multiplex qPCR targeting, among others, Borrelia burgdorferi (sensu lato), Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia miyamotoi, Neoehrlichia mikurensis, Babesia spp., Rickettsia helvetica and tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV). The same methodology as in 2017 was used.

Results: In 2021, the same tick species as in 2017 were identified in similar proportions; of 1094 ticks, 98.7% were Ixodes ricinus, 0.8% Ixodes hexagonus and 0.5% Dermacentor reticulatus. A total of 928 nymphs and adults could be screened for the presence of pathogens. Borrelia burgdorferi (s.l.) was detected in 9.9% (95% CI 8.2-12.0%), which is significantly lower than the prevalence of 13.9% (95% CI 12.2-15.7%) in 2017 (P = 0.004). The prevalences of A. phagocytophilum (4.7%; 95% CI 3.5-6.3%) and R. helvetica (13.3%; 95% CI 11.2-15.6%) in 2021 were significantly higher compared to 2017 (1.8%; 95% CI 1.3-2.7% and 6.8%; 95% CI 5.6-8.2% respectively) (P < 0.001 for both). For the other pathogens tested, no statistical differences compared to 2017 were found, with prevalences ranging between 1.5 and 2.9% in 2021. Rickettsia raoultii was again found in D. reticulatus ticks (n = 3/5 in 2021). Similar to 2017, no TBEV was detected in the ticks. Co-infections were found in 5.1% of ticks. When combining co-infection occurrence in 2017 and 2021, a positive correlation was observed between B. burgdorferi (s.l.) and N. mikurensis and B. burgdorferi (s.l.) and B. miyamotoi (P < 0.001 for both).

Conclusions: Although the 2021 prevalences fell within expectations, differences were found compared to 2017. Further research to understand the explanations behind these differences is needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Parasites & Vectors
Parasites & Vectors 医学-寄生虫学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
9.40%
发文量
433
审稿时长
1.4 months
期刊介绍: Parasites & Vectors is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal dealing with the biology of parasites, parasitic diseases, intermediate hosts, vectors and vector-borne pathogens. Manuscripts published in this journal will be available to all worldwide, with no barriers to access, immediately following acceptance. However, authors retain the copyright of their material and may use it, or distribute it, as they wish. Manuscripts on all aspects of the basic and applied biology of parasites, intermediate hosts, vectors and vector-borne pathogens will be considered. In addition to the traditional and well-established areas of science in these fields, we also aim to provide a vehicle for publication of the rapidly developing resources and technology in parasite, intermediate host and vector genomics and their impacts on biological research. We are able to publish large datasets and extensive results, frequently associated with genomic and post-genomic technologies, which are not readily accommodated in traditional journals. Manuscripts addressing broader issues, for example economics, social sciences and global climate change in relation to parasites, vectors and disease control, are also welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of multi-parallel quantitative real-time PCRs targeting different DNA regions and detecting soil-transmitted helminths in stool The spread of the invasive mosquito Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) in Portugal: a first genetic analysis Report of a new species of sand fly, Phlebotomus (Anaphlebotomus) ajithii n. sp. (Diptera: Psychodidae), from Western Ghats, India Baseline gut microbiota diversity and composition and albendazole efficacy in hookworm-infected individuals Insights from multigene analysis: first report of a Southeast Asian Mosquito, Aedes (Mucidus) laniger (Diptera: Culicidae) on Jeju Island from Korea
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1