Helicobacter pylori and Hepatitis a Virus Infection in School‐Aged Children on Two Isolated Neighborhood Islands in Taiwan

Abstract

Background. The transmission routes of Helicobacter pylori and hepatitis A virus (HAV) infections have been extensively discussed in previous literature. However, whether H. pylori and HAV shared the same transmission pattern or not remains unclear. Lower socioeconomic status was recognized as a consistent risk factor to both infections. However, whether fecal‐oral transmission was a risk factor to both infections is still under debate. Materials and Methods. In 1996, we conducted a cross‐sectional study to evaluate the seroprevalence of antibody to H. pylori and HAV among the randomly selected school‐aged children (age between 13 and 15) on Green Island (n = 91) and Lanyu Island (n = 138) (two isolated neighborhood islands near Taiwan Main Island). Results. The seroprevalence of H. pylori and HAV on the Green Island were 82.4% and 5.5%, respectively. The seroprevalence of H. pylori and HAV on Lanyu Island were 71.0% and 90.6%, respectively. H. pylori seroprevalence of all children and the subgroup of 13‐year‐olds was significantly lower on Lanyu Island than Green Island. However, it was not significantly different in subgroups of 14‐ and 15‐year‐olds. HAV seroprevalence was significantly higher on Lanyu Island than Green Island among all children and in each age subgroup. The correlation of H. pylori infection and HAV infection did not demonstrate significant linear correlation on both islands. Conclusions. In conclusion, H. pylori and HAV infections in school‐aged children of 13–15 years of age on Green Island and Lanyu Island did not demonstrate significant correlation. The results of this study imply that H. pylori and HAV may share different transmission routes of infection.

Serologic Evidence for Fecal–Oral Transmission of Helicobacter pylori

“…Results in this study contrast with prior studies by Chen and others 23 examining a small adolescent population in Taiwan (N = 91), Egemen and others 24 in a sample of children in Izmir, Turkey (N = 102), Lin and others 25 with a sample of primary school students in Taipei (N = 289), and Furuta and others 26 with a clinic-based sample of adults in Japan (N = 1,043). These studies reported weak nonsignificant associations between H. pylori and HAV serology, but were limited in size and scope (all studied non-adult populations, except for Furuta and others) and not generalizable to broader populations.…”

Seroprevalence of <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> and Hepatitis A Virus among Children in Rural Central Taiwan

“…The overall prevalence of H. pylori was previously reported to be as high as 54.7z among high school children, significantly higher than the HAV prevalence among children 13-15 years of age (82.4z vs. 5.5z) in Lanyu Island and Green Island, Taiwan (32,46). Recent studies also showed significantly higher prevalence of anti-H. pylori antibodies among teachers compared to children 9-15 years of age (33,47), possibly due to improved socioeconomic and environmental conditions in Taiwan between the 1980s and recent years.…”

“…Although some sero-epidemiologic studies reported a common mode of transmission for HAV and H. pylori (46,53,54), another study showed no significant association between H. pylori and HAV seropositivity (28). Because HAV is a sensitive marker of fecal exposure, correlation between HAV and H. pylori seropositivity rates would indicate similar modes of transmission for these 2 pathogens.…”

Long‐term Follow up of Helicobacter pylori IgG Serology After Eradication and Reinfection Rate of H. pylori in South Korea

“…Although there continues to be debate regarding the H. pylori infection route, the main infection route is thought to be person‐to‐person and frequently within families including children, who can easily get infected [36–39]. Recently, the possibility of oral‐to‐oral infections has been raised instead of fecal to oral [40–42]. If the reinfection is caused by outside source of infection, it might be related with present socioeconomic condition.…”