Exposure to multiple pathogens - serological evidence for Rift Valley fever virus, Coxiella burnetii, Bluetongue virus and Brucella spp. in cattle, sheep and goat in Mali

Dione, Michel M.; Séry, Amadou; Sidibé, Cheick Abou Kounta; Wieland, Barbara; Fall, Abdou Salam

doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0010342

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analysis at the animal level showed that 127,542 (6.00%) of the dairy cows were truly seropositive with C. burnetii . The prevalence of antibodies in sera of tested animals was estimated at 7.06% (true seroprevalence 6%) and was lower than the 14.85% reported by Saglam and Sahin ( 39 ) in Turkey, 47.2% recorded in Hungary ( 10 ) and 55.3% noted in Mali ( 9 ). In Latvia, 27% of cows which aborted tested positive for the presence of C. burnetii antibodies ( 7 ).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 60%

Screening for Coxiella burnetii in dairy cattle herds in Poland

Szymańska-Czerwińska¹,

Jodełko²,

Osiński

et al. 2022

Journal of Veterinary Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The intracellular bacterium Coxiella burnetii is the aetiological agent of Q fever, a zoonosis affecting many animal species worldwide. Cattle and small ruminants are considered the major reservoirs of the bacteria and they shed it through multiple routes. Material and Methods A total of 2,180 sera samples from 801 cattle herds in all Polish voivodeships were tested by ELISA for the presence of specific antibodies. Milk samples were obtained from seropositive cows in 133 herds as part of a separate study. The milk samples were examined by ELISA and real-time PCR tests. Results Seroprevalence at the animal level was 7.06% and true positive seroprevalence was 6.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1–9.4). Seroprevalence at the herd level was estimated at 11.1% and true positive seroprevalence was 10.5% (95% CI 3.2–15.8). Shedding of the pathogen in milk was detected by real-time PCR in 33 out of 133 tested herds (24.81%, 95% CI 17.74–33.04%) and the presence of C. burnetii antibodies was confirmed in 85 of them (63.9%, 95% CI 55.13–72.05%). The highest level of conformity between ELISA and real-time PCR results was obtained for bulk tank milk samples. Conclusion Coxiella burnetii infections are quite common in cattle herds across the country, which emphasises the crucial roles of surveillance and adequate biosecurity measures in the prevention and limitation of Q fever spread in Poland.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 60%

Screening for Coxiella burnetii in dairy cattle herds in Poland

Szymańska-Czerwińska¹,

Jodełko²,

Osiński

et al. 2022

Journal of Veterinary Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among the primary consequences of this disease are infertility, fetal death, late-gestation abortion, and decreased cattle productivity [ 26 , 27 ]. It is becoming more and more evident that brucellosis poses a serious public health risk in many underdeveloped countries due to the rise in incidences of morbidity in both humans and animals [ 28 , 29 ]. It is possible for humans to become infected with the disease either by coming into direct contact with sick animals or by consuming contaminated milk and milk products [ 29 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Diagnostic and Vaccine Strategies for Early Detection and Control of Human Brucellosis, Particularly in Endemic Areas

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brucellosis is considered one of the most serious zoonotic diseases worldwide. This disease affects both human and animal health, in addition to being one of the most widespread zoonotic illnesses in the Middle East and Northern Africa. Human brucellosis generally presents in a diverse and non-specific manner, making laboratory confirmation of the diagnosis critical to the patient’s recovery. A coordinated strategy for diagnosing and controlling brucellosis throughout the Middle East is required, as this disease cannot be known to occur without reliable microbiological, molecular, and epidemiological evidence. Consequently, the current review focuses on the current and emerging microbiological diagnostic tools for the early detection and control of human brucellosis. Laboratory assays such as culturing, serology, and molecular analysis can frequently be used to diagnose brucellosis. Although serological markers and nucleic acid amplification techniques are extremely sensitive, and extensive experience has been gained with these techniques in the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis, a culture is still considered to be the “gold standard” due to the importance of this aspect of public health and clinical care. In endemic regions, however, serological tests remain the primary method of diagnosis due to their low cost, user-friendliness, and strong ability to provide a negative prediction, so they are commonly used. A nucleic acid amplification assay, which is highly sensitive, specific, and safe, is capable of enabling rapid disease diagnosis. Patients who have reportedly fully healed may continue to have positive molecular test results for a long time. Therefore, cultures and serological methods will continue to be the main tools for diagnosing and following up on human brucellosis for as long as no commercial tests or studies demonstrate adequate interlaboratory reproducibility. As there is no approved vaccine that prevents human brucellosis, vaccination-based control of animal brucellosis has become an important part of the management of human brucellosis. Over the past few decades, several studies have been conducted to develop Brucella vaccines, but the problem of controlling brucellosis in both humans and animals remains challenging. Therefore, this review also aims to present an updated overview of the different types of brucellosis vaccines that are currently available.

show abstract

“…Of the 388 eligible articles, 183 were excluded for multiple reasons described in Figure 1. Finally, a total of 205 articles (629 data on prevalence and/or CFR) met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review (Abakar et al., 2014; Abdallah et al., 2016; Adamu, 2020; Adamu et al., 2021; Adesiyun et al., 2020; Ahmed et al., 2018, 2020; Alhaji, 2020; Andayi et al., 2014; Andriamandimby et al., 2010; Andriamandimby et al., 2018; Aradaib et al., 2013; Archer et al., 2011, 2013; Atuman et al., 2022; Ayari‐Fakhfakh et al., 2011; Ba et al., 2012; Baudin et al., 2016; Beechler et al., 2015; van den Bergh et al., 2022; Bett et al., 2019; Bird et al., 2008; Bisimwa et al., 2016; Bloland et al., 2010; Blomstrom et al., 2016; Bob et al., 2017, 2022; Bonney et al., 2013; Bosworth et al., 2016; Boushab et al., 2015, 2016; Boussini et al., 2013, 2014; Breiman et al., 2010; Budasha et al., 2018; Budodo et al., 2020; Bukbuk et al., 2014; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2007; Chambaro et al., 2022; Chengula et al., 2014; Chevalier et al., 2005, 2011; Cichon et al., 2021; Clements et al., 2019; Cook et al., 2017; Cosseddu et al., 2021; Di Nardo et al., 2014; Diallo et al., 2005; Dione et al., 2022; Dondona et al., 2016; Durand et al., 2003, 2020; Dutuze et al., 2020; Ebogo‐Belobo et al., 2022; Eckstein et al., 2022; El Bahgy et al., 2018; El Mamy et al., …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The pooled RVF prevalence in humans was estimated to be 7.8% [95% CI = 6.2–9.6] based on a sample of 102,427 participants. RVF prevalence data displayed presented substantial heterogeneity among the studies ( I 2 = 99.0% [95% CI = 98.9–99.0], p < 0.0001) (Adamu et al., 2021; Ahmed et al., 2018, 2020; Andayi et al., 2014; Andriamandimby et al., 2010; Aradaib et al., 2013; Archer et al., 2011, 2013; Atuman et al., 2022; Baudin et al., 2016; van den Bergh et al., 2022; Bett et al., 2019; Bloland et al., 2010; Bob et al., 2017, 2022; Bonney et al., 2013; Bosworth et al., 2016; Boushab et al., 2015; Breiman et al., 2010; Budodo et al., 2020; Bukbuk et al., 2014; Chambaro et al., 2022; Cichon et al., 2021; Clements et al., 2019; Cook et al., 2017; Cosseddu et al., 2021; Dione et al., 2022; Durand et al., 2003; Eckstein et al., 2022; Enem et al., 2020; Faye et al., 2007; Fokam et al., 2010; Gray et al., 2015; Grolla et al., 2012; Grossi‐Soyster et al., 2017; Gudo, Lesko, et al., 2016; Gudo, Pinto, et al., 2016; Guillebaud et al., 2018; Hassan et al., 2020; Hassanain et al., 2010; Heinrich et al., 2012; Ibrahim et al., 2021; Labeaud et al., 2008; Labeaud, Muiruri, et al., 2011; Labeaud et al., 2015; Muiruri et al., 2015; Lagare et al., 2019; Lysholm et al., 2022; Macharia et al., 2010; Mahmoud & Ali, 2021; Makiala‐Mandanda et al., 2018; Marrama et al., 2005; Mease et al., 2011; Mohamed et al., 2019; Msimang et...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The pooled RVF prevalence in humans was estimated to be 7.8% [95% CI = 6.2–9.6] based on a sample of 102,427 participants. RVF prevalence data displayed presented substantial heterogeneity among the studies ( I 2 = 99.0% [95% CI = 98.9–99.0], p < 0.0001) (Adamu et al., 2021 ; Ahmed et al., 2020 , 2018 ; Andayi et al., 2014 ; Andriamandimby et al., 2010 ; Aradaib et al., 2013 ; Archer et al., 2013 , 2011 ; Atuman et al., 2022 ; Baudin et al., 2016 ; van den Bergh et al., 2022 ; Bett et al., 2019 ; Bloland et al., 2010 ; Bob et al., 2017 , 2022 ; Bonney et al., 2013 ; Bosworth et al., 2016 ; Boushab et al., 2015 ; Breiman et al., 2010 ; Budodo et al., 2020 ; Bukbuk et al., 2014 ; Chambaro et al., 2022 ; Cichon et al., 2021 ; Clements et al., 2019 ; Cook et al., 2017 ; Cosseddu et al., 2021 ; Dione et al., 2022 ; Durand et al., 2003 ; Eckstein et al., 2022 ; Enem et al., 2020 ; Faye et al., 2007 ; Fokam et al., 2010 ; Gray et al., 2015 ; Grolla et al., 2012 ; Grossi‐Soyster et al., 2017 ; Gudo, Lesko, et al., 2016 ; Gudo, Pinto, et al., 2016 ; Guillebaud et al., 2018 ; Hassan et al., 2020 ; Hassanain et al., 2010 ; Heinrich et al., 2012 ; Ibrahim et al., 2021 ; Labeaud et al., 2008 ; Labeaud, Muiruri, et al.,…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contemporary epidemiological data of Rift Valley fever virus in humans, mosquitoes and other animal species in Africa: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Ebogo‐Belobo,

Kenmoe,

Abanda

et al. 2023

Veterinary Medicine & Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rift Valley fever (RVF) is a severe zoonotic mosquito‐borne disease that represents an important threat to human and animal health, with major public health and socioeconomic impacts. This disease is endemic throughout many African countries and the Arabian Peninsula. This systematic review with meta‐analysis was conducted to determine the RVF prevalence in humans, mosquitoes and other animal species in Africa. The review also provides contemporary data on RVF case fatality rate (CFR) in humans. In this systematic review with meta‐analysis, a comprehensive literature search was conducted on the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Global Index Medicus databases from January 2000 to June 2022 to identify relevant studies. Pooled CFR and prevalence estimates were calculated using the random‐effects model. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed, and the I2‐statistic was used to investigate a potential source of heterogeneity. A total of 205 articles were included in the final analysis. The overall RVF CFR in humans was found to be 27.5% [95% CI = 8.0–52.5]. The overall pooled prevalence was 7.8% [95% CI = 6.2–9.6] in humans and 9.3% [95% CI = 8.1–10.6] in animals, respectively. The RVF prevalence in individual mosquitoes ranged from 0.0% to 25%. Subgroup analysis showed substantial heterogeneity with respect to geographical regions and human categories. The study shows that there is a correspondingly similar prevalence of RVF in human and animals; however, human CFR is much higher than the observed prevalence. The lack of a surveillance programme and the fact that this virus has subclinical circulation in animals and humans could explain these observations. The implementation of a One Health approach for RVF surveillance and control would be of great interest for human and animal health.

show abstract

Exposure to multiple pathogens - serological evidence for Rift Valley fever virus, Coxiella burnetii, Bluetongue virus and Brucella spp. in cattle, sheep and goat in Mali

Cited by 9 publications

References 20 publications

Screening for Coxiella burnetii in dairy cattle herds in Poland

Screening for Coxiella burnetii in dairy cattle herds in Poland

The Development of Diagnostic and Vaccine Strategies for Early Detection and Control of Human Brucellosis, Particularly in Endemic Areas

Contemporary epidemiological data of Rift Valley fever virus in humans, mosquitoes and other animal species in Africa: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About