-
Scientific Reports Mar 2021This study aimed to consolidate current knowledge of wildlife brucellosis in Africa and to analyse available predictors of infection. The Preferred Reporting Items for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This study aimed to consolidate current knowledge of wildlife brucellosis in Africa and to analyse available predictors of infection. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Information on species, test used, test results, area, rainfall, livestock and wildlife contact and year of study were extracted. This systematic review revealed 42 prevalence studies, nine disease control articles and six articles on epidemiology. Brucella abortus, Brucella melitensis, Brucella inopinata and Brucella suis were reported in wildlife. The prevalence studies revealed serological evidence of brucellosis in buffalo, antelope (positive in 14/28 species), carnivores (4/12) and other species (7/20) over the last five decades. Buffalo populations were more likely to be infected and had a higher seroprevalence than other species; the pooled seroprevalence was 13.7% (95% CI 10.3-17.3%) in buffalo, 7.1% (95% CI 1.1-15.5%) in carnivores and 2.1% (95% CI 0.1-4.9%) in antelope. Wildlife in high rainfall areas (≥ 800 mm) were more likely to be infected, and infected populations showed higher seroprevalence in high rainfall areas and in studies published after 2000. Domestic animal contact was associated with increased seroprevalence in antelope and carnivore species, but not in buffalo, supporting the hypothesis that buffalo may be a reservoir species.
Topics: Africa; Animal Diseases; Animals; Animals, Wild; Arachnid Vectors; Brucella; Brucellosis; Cross-Sectional Studies; Host-Pathogen Interactions; Multivariate Analysis; Public Health Surveillance; Seroepidemiologic Studies; Ticks; Zoonoses
PubMed: 33727580
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85441-w -
BMC Public Health Aug 2016Brucellosis is a debilitating zoonotic disease affecting humans and animals. A comprehensive, evidence-based assessment of literature and officially available data on... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Brucellosis is a debilitating zoonotic disease affecting humans and animals. A comprehensive, evidence-based assessment of literature and officially available data on animal and human brucellosis for Kenya are missing. The aim of the current review is to provide frequency estimates of brucellosis in humans, animals and risk factors for human infection, and help to understand the current situation in Kenya.
METHODS
A total of accessible 36 national and international publications on brucellosis from 1916 to 2016 were reviewed to estimate the frequency of brucellosis in humans and animals, and strength of associations between potential risk factors and seropositivity in humans in Kenya.
RESULTS
The conducted studies revealed only few and fragmented evidence of the disease spatial and temporal distribution in an epidemiological context. Bacteriological evidence revealed the presence of Brucella (B.) abortus and B. melitensis in cattle and human patients, whilst B. suis was isolated from wild rodents only. Similar evidence for Brucella spp infection in small ruminants and other animal species is unavailable. The early and most recent serological studies revealed that animal brucellosis is widespread in all animal production systems. The animal infection pressure in these systems has remained strong due to mixing of large numbers of animals from different geographical regions, movement of livestock in search of pasture, communal sharing of grazing land, and the concentration of animals around water points. Human cases are more likely seen in groups occupationally or domestically exposed to livestock or practicing risky social-cultural activities such as consumption of raw blood and dairy products, and slaughtering of animals within the homesteads. Many brucellosis patients are misdiagnosed and probably mistreated due to lack of reliable laboratory diagnostic support resulting to adverse health outcomes of the patients and routine disease underreporting. We found no studies of disease incidence estimates or disease control efforts.
CONCLUSION
The risk for re-emergence and transmission of brucellosis is evident as a result of the co-existence of animal husbandry activities and social-cultural activities that promote brucellosis transmission. Well-designed countrywide, evidence-based, and multidisciplinary studies of brucellosis at the human/livestock/wildlife interface are needed. These could help to generate reliable frequency and potential impact estimates, to identify Brucella reservoirs, and to propose control strategies of proven efficacy.
Topics: Animal Husbandry; Animals; Animals, Domestic; Animals, Wild; Brucella; Brucella abortus; Brucella melitensis; Brucellosis; Cattle; Communicable Diseases, Emerging; Humans; Incidence; Kenya; Risk Factors; Zoonoses
PubMed: 27549329
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-016-3532-9 -
Tropical Medicine & International... May 2017The most common form of transmitting human brucellosis is through contaminated food or direct contact with infected animals. Human-to-human transmission (HHT) has been... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The most common form of transmitting human brucellosis is through contaminated food or direct contact with infected animals. Human-to-human transmission (HHT) has been described as isolated case reports. The aim of this systematic review was to describe all cases of HHT of human brucellosis reported in the medical literature.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus and Scielo databases using specific search terms published until March 2016. Two investigators independently determined study eligibility. All clinical data were evaluated to construct a table comprising the most important clinical aspects, age, gender, confirmed infection and detection method, transmission method and HHT confirmation and potential source of infection for human transmission. No statistical method was employed in this study.
RESULTS
The initial search resulted in 615 publications, but only 35 were included. 45 brucellosis HHT cases were identified. 61% of patients who acquired brucellosis from another human were <1 year old (newborn and breastfeeding). Other cases include sexual transmission, blood transfusion, bone marrow transplantation and aerosol from an infected patient. Most patients (40/45) presented symptoms upon diagnosis. Diagnostic tests included culture, molecular methods and serum testing.
CONCLUSION
Human brucellosis is a disease liable to transmission between humans by placental barrier, lactation, sexual and tissues such as blood and bone marrow. The indication for screening in tissue banks, transplants, blood and pregnancy is not yet established.
Topics: Blood Transfusion; Bone Marrow Transplantation; Breast Feeding; Brucella; Brucellosis; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Sexually Transmitted Diseases
PubMed: 28196298
DOI: 10.1111/tmi.12856 -
Infectious Diseases of Poverty Jan 2024Brucellosis is a zoonotic affliction instigated by bacteria belonging to the genus Brucella and is characterized by a diverse range of pervasiveness, multiple... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Brucellosis is a zoonotic affliction instigated by bacteria belonging to the genus Brucella and is characterized by a diverse range of pervasiveness, multiple transmission routes, and serious hazards. It is imperative to amalgamate the current knowledge and identify gaps pertaining to the role of ticks in brucellosis transmission.
METHODS
We systematically searched China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, Google Scholar, and PubMed on the topic published until April 23, 2022. The procedure was performed in accordance with the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The selected articles were categorized across three major topic areas, and the potential data was extracted to describe evidence-practice gaps by two reviewers.
RESULTS
The search identified 83 eligible studies for the final analyses. The results highlighted the potential capacity of ticks in brucellosis transmission as evidenced by the detection of Brucella in 16 different tick species. The pooled overall prevalence of Brucella in ticks was 33.87% (range: 0.00-87.80%). The review also revealed the capability of Brucella to circulate in parasitic ticks' different developmental stages, thus posing a potential threat to animal and human health. Empirical evidence from in vitro rodent infection experiments has revealed that ticks possess the capability to transmit Brucella to uninfected animals (range: 45.00-80.00%). Moreover, significant epidemiological associations have been found between the occurrence of brucellosis in animals and tick control in rangelands, which further suggests that ticks may serve as potential vectors for brucellosis transmission in ruminants. Notably, a mere three cases of human brucellosis resulting from potential tick bites were identified in search of global clinical case reports from 1963 to 2019.
CONCLUSIONS
It is imperative to improve the techniques used to identify Brucella in ticks, particularly by developing a novel, efficient, precise approach that can be applied in a field setting. Furthermore, due to the lack of adequate evidence of tick-borne brucellosis, it is essential to integrate various disciplines, including experimental animal science, epidemiology, molecular genetics, and others, to better understand the efficacy of tick-borne brucellosis. By amalgamating multiple disciplines, we can enhance our comprehension and proficiency in tackling tick-borne brucellosis.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Ticks; Professional Practice Gaps; Brucellosis; Brucella; China
PubMed: 38191468
DOI: 10.1186/s40249-023-01170-4 -
PloS One 2020Brucellosis is an endemic disease in food-producing animals in Mosul, Iraq. The objectives of the study reported here were: (i) to identify and assess the evidence and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Brucellosis is an endemic disease in food-producing animals in Mosul, Iraq. The objectives of the study reported here were: (i) to identify and assess the evidence and knowledge gaps in published studies that have examined brucellosis in different food-producing animals in Mosul, Iraq; using systematic review approach, and (ii) to quantify the seroprevalence of brucellosis in the city using meta-analysis approach. Google Scholar was used as a search engine to track pertinent peer-reviewed research reports. The search was conducted on November 24, 2019. Keywords used were: brucella, animal, Mosul, Iraq. Peer-reviewed published studies, MSc theses, and PhD dissertations written in Arabic or English were included. Duplicate records were removed, and the screening process was conducted at three levels: titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. Identified studies that have reported the seroprevalence of brucellosis were included in a meta-analysis to calculate an overall prevalence. A total of 214 records were initially identified. Seventeen research reports were added from personal contact and qualified articles' references list. Thirty six articles were qualified for review after removing 35 duplicate records, 155 titles, 11 abstracts, and 5 full text articles. Seventeen studies reported the prevalence of brucellosis, 11 studies assessed different serological tests for diagnosis of brucellosis, 9 studies isolated Brucella spp. from animal specimens and/or animal products, and 4 studies assessed vaccination procedures against brucellosis. The overall seroprevalence of brucellosis in food-producing animals in Mosul over a period of 40 years was 14.14%, including 14.46% for sheep, 12.99% for goats, 11.69% for cattle, and 22.64% for buffalo. The study concluded that the disease is evident in the city with increasing trends over the years, buffalo shows high seroprevalence, the degree of agreement of Rose-Bengal test as a screening test is fair compared to more accurate serological tests such as ELISA; and the disease constitutes a public health concern in the city. Additional studies are important to identify the overlooked predisposing factors, estimate the abortion rate attributable to brucellosis in food-producing animals, and evaluate efficacy of vaccination programs in reducing the prevalence of brucellosis and/or abortion rate.
Topics: Animals; Brucella; Brucellosis; Buffaloes; Cattle; Cattle Diseases; Goat Diseases; Goats; Humans; Iraq; Seroepidemiologic Studies; Sheep; Sheep Diseases
PubMed: 32645099
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235862 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases May 2020Brucellosis is a neglected zoonotic disease of remarkable importance worldwide. The focus of this systematic review was to investigate occupational brucellosis and to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Brucellosis is a neglected zoonotic disease of remarkable importance worldwide. The focus of this systematic review was to investigate occupational brucellosis and to identify the main infection risks for each group exposed to the pathogen. Seven databases were used to identify papers related to occupational brucellosis: CABI, Cochrane, Pubmed, Scielo, Science Direct, Scopus and Web of Science. The search resulted in 6123 studies, of which 63 were selected using the quality assessment tools guided from National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Case Report Guidelines (CARE). Five different job-related groups were considered greatly exposed to the disease: rural workers, abattoir workers, veterinarians and veterinary assistants, laboratory workers and hunters. The main risk factors and exposure sources involved in the occupational infection observed from the analysis of the articles were direct contact with animal fluids, failure to comply with the use of personal protective equipment, accidental exposure to live attenuated anti-brucellosis vaccines and non-compliance with biosafety standards. Brucella species frequently isolated from job-related infection were Brucella melitensis, Brucella abortus, Brucella suis and Brucella canis. In addition, a meta-analysis was performed using the case-control studies and demonstrated that animal breeders, laboratory workers and abattoir workers have 3.47 [95% confidence interval (CI); 1.47-8.19] times more chance to become infected with Brucella spp. than others individuals that have no contact with the possible sources of infection. This systematic review improved the understanding of the epidemiology of brucellosis as an occupational disease. Rural workers, abattoir workers, veterinarians, laboratory workers and hunters were the groups more exposed to occupational Brucella spp. infection. Moreover, it was observed that the lack of knowledge about brucellosis among frequently exposed professionals, in addition to some behaviors, such as negligence in the use of individual and collective protective measures, increases the probability of infection.
Topics: Abattoirs; Animals; Brucella; Brucellosis; Humans; Laboratory Personnel; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Veterinarians
PubMed: 32392223
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008164 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Jan 2024Currently, vaccination of livestock with attenuated strains of Brucella remains an essential measure for controlling brucellosis, although these vaccines may be...
BACKGROUND
Currently, vaccination of livestock with attenuated strains of Brucella remains an essential measure for controlling brucellosis, although these vaccines may be dangerous to humans. The aim of this study was to review the risk posed to humans by occupational exposure to vaccine strains and the measures that should be implemented to minimize this risk.
METHODS
This article reviewed the scientific literature indexed in PubMed up to September 30, 2023, following "the PRISMA guidelines". Special emphasis was placed on the vaccine strain used and the route of exposure. Non-occupational exposure to vaccine strains, intentional human inoculation, publications on exposure to wild strains, and secondary scientific sources were excluded from the study.
RESULTS
Nineteen primary reports were found and classified in three subgroups: safety accidents in vaccine factories that led to an outbreak (n = 2), survellaince studies on vaccine manufacturing workers with a serologic diagnosis of Brucella infection (n = 3), and publications of infection by vaccine strains during their administration, including case reports, records of occupational accidents and investigations of outbreaks in vaccination campaigns (n = 14). Although accidental exposure during vaccine manufacturing were uncommon, they could provoke large outbreaks through airborne spread with risk of spread to the neighboring population. Besides, despite strict protection measures, a percentage of vaccine manufacturing workers developed positive Brucella serology without clinical infection. The most frequent type of exposure with symptomatic infection was needle injury during vaccine administration. Prolonged contact with the pathogen, lack of information and a low adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) use in the work environment were commonly associated with infection.
CONCLUSIONS
Brucella vaccines pose occupational risk of contagion to humans from their production to their administration to livestock, although morbidity is low and deaths were not reported. Recommended protective measures and active surveillance of exposed workers appeared to reduce this risk. It would be advisable to carry out observational studies and/or systematic registries using solid diagnostic criteria.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Brucella Vaccine; Brucellosis; Brucella; Vaccination; Occupational Exposure; Livestock; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 38190394
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011889