Brucellosis - An Unknown and Underdiagnosed Infection in Bulgaria

Nenova, Rumiana; Tomova, Iskra

doi:10.58395/pipd.v45i1.2

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to generally accepted criteria, values ≥1:160 are assumed as a diagnostic titer [13,14]. The sensitivity and specificity of SAT vary widely from 32.5 -100% and 96.4% -100%, respectively, and specificity is lower in endemic areas due to the above-mentioned high seroprevalence [15][16][17][18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of the reported human cases in Bulgaria in 2005 resulted from an occupational contact with infected animals in a neighboring endemic country [11]. Moreover, during the next ten years (2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015) as a result of "illegal imports" of infected small ruminants, two autochthonous outbreaks were reported [12,16,17]. Aim.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Serological Study of Bulgarian Patients With Brucellosis

Nenova

Tomova²,

Goryanova

2021

Probl Infect Parasit Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Brucellosis is a widespread zoonotic infection with significant health and socio-economic impacts. This determines the need of a reliable laboratory diagnosis both in endemic areas around the world and in countries where it is rare and under diagnosed. Due to prolongedand hazardous cultivation procedures, the diagnosis is mostly serologically confirmed. Aim: Serological study of Bulgarian citizens with clinical and/or epidemiological data compatible to brucellosis for the period 2005-2015. Materials and methods: Based on clinical and epidemiological data obtained via standard questionnaire 3394 persons suspected for brucellosis along with 106 controls were serologically studied with Rose Bengal slide test, Standard agglutination test, Coombs’ test, Brucellacapt and ELISA. Results: Brucellosis was confirmed in 174 patients. In outbreak related cases the tests listed above were positive in 127 (78.88%), 115 (71.43%), 34 (91.98%), 143 (95.33%) and 104 (96.30%), respectively. A statistically significant positive correlation was found between Coombs’ and Brucellacapt in the studied 55 sera samples (rs = 0,72; p < 0,0000). The profile of anti-Brucella antibodies was investigated in 46 patients with different duration of the disease. In 29 (63.0%) of them the initial serum sample was positive for the three classes of antibodies and in 17 (36.9%) the primary testing didn’t detect IgM, but IgG and IgA. Conclusion: None of the serological tests alone could ensure an accurate diagnosis of brucellosis. It is necessary to use a diagnostic algorithm with appropriately selected serological tests in which Brucellacapt could successfully replace Coombs' test´ for detection of incomplete antibodies in brucellosis with long duration.

show abstract