2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Effect of Isolation Measures on the Incidence and Prevalence of Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Hemodialysis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Nosocomial transmission of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in hemodialysis (HD) units is well established. In units with a high prevalence of HCV infection, the implementation of universal precautionary measures may not suffice in order to decrease the incidence and prevalence of HCV. In this setting strict isolation practices can be useful in order to achieve this goal. Methods: The incidence and prevalence of HCV infection amongst all HD and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients from the province of Albacete, Spain, have been studied from 1992 to 2003.Through the 1993–1995 period chronic HD patients were treated either in a room exclusively for HCV– patients or in a room shared by HCV+ and HCV– patients. Complete separation of HCV+ and HCV– patients was implemented in 1995. Acute patients have been separated since 1992. The implementation of universal precautions was applied throughout the period. Results: There has not been a single seroconversion in the rooms where only HCV– patients were dialyzed during the 11 years of follow-up. There were two seroconversions in the rooms shared for 3 years by both HCV+ and HCV– patients. In 1995 the prevalence of HCV+ cases in HD and PD was 21.6 and 23.2%, respectively. Since then it has decreased steadily and in parallel for both therapies, and the current prevalence is 6.8% in HD and 5.7% in PD. Conclusions: In HD units with a high prevalence of HCV+ patients, strict isolation in combination with implementation of universal prevention measures can eliminate nosocomial transmission and obtain a long-term reduction in prevalence.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effects of hepatitis C infection and renal transplantation on survival in end-stage renal disease. The New England Organ Bank Hepatitis C Study Group.

          Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common among patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, the effect of HCV infection on survival among ESRD patients, and the impact of renal transplantation on the course of HCV infection has not been adequately defined. Sera from patients on the renal transplant waiting list at the New England Organ Bank between November 1986 and June 1990 were tested for anti-HCV using a third generation ELISA. All anti-HCV positive patients and a 1:1 ratio of randomly selected anti-HCV negative patients comprised the study sample. Duration of follow-up was calculated from the date of the first available serum specimen until death, loss to follow-up or December 31, 1995, whichever occurred earlier. Multivariate analysis of risk factors for mortality was performed using a Cox proportional hazards model which included anti-HCV as a time-independent (baseline) variable, transplantation as a time-dependent (follow-up) variable, and independently significant baseline covariates. Anti-HCV was detected in 287 (19%) of 1544 patients in whom sera were available, and 286 anti-HCV negative patients served as controls. Complete information was available in 496 (87%) of these 573 patients. Median follow-up was 73 months (range 1 to 110 months), during which time 302 (61%) patients underwent renal transplantation and 154 (31%) patients died. For anti-HCV positive patients compared to anti-HCV negative patients, the relative risk of death (and 95% confidence intervals) from all causes was 1.41 (1.01 to 1.97) and due to liver disease or infection was 2.39 (1.28 to 4.48). For patients who underwent transplantation compared to those who remained on dialysis, the relative risk of death from all causes between 0 to 3 months, 3 to 6 months, seven months to four years, and after four years was 4.75 (2.76 to 8.17), 1.76 (0.75 to 4.13), 0.31 (0.18 to 0.54) and 0.84 (0.51 to 1.37), respectively. There was no interaction between the effect of anti-HCV status as baseline and subsequent transplantation (P = 0.93), meaning that the association between treatment modality and survival was similar among anti-HCV positive and negative patients, at all intervals after transplantation. We conclude that HCV infection at the time of referral for transplantation is associated with an increased risk of death, irrespective of whether patients remain on dialysis or undergo transplantation. Transplantation has a beneficial rather than adverse effect on long-term survival in anti-HCV positive patients. Hence, anti-HCV positive status alone is not a contraindication for renal transplantation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Hepatitis C virus infection in dialysis and renal transplantation.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The changing epidemiology of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in haemodialysis: European multicentre study.

              The high prevalence of anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibodies in HD patients has been known since the early 1990s but its evolution over the last decade is poorly documented. All chronic HD patients from 15 Belgian units were tested at (re)start of HD and every 18 months for anti-HCV antibodies (ELISA 2 in May 1991 and November 1992, then ELISA 3 until May 2000). All chronic HD patients from HD units from eight other European countries, whose prevalence of anti-HCV (+) patients had been studied in 1991-1994 (and published except in one country), were tested for anti-HCV antibodies in 1999. Anti-HCV (+) prevalence decreased (P<0.001) from 13.5 (1991) to 6.8% (2000) in the Belgian cohort (n = 1710). Prevalence also decreased (P<0.05) in the participating units from France (42-30%), Sweden (16-9%) and Italy (28-16%), tended to decrease in the participating units from UK (7-3%, P = 0.058) and Hungary (26-15%, P = 0.057) but did not change (NS) in the participating units from Germany (7 to 6%), Spain (5 to 12%) and Poland (42 to 44%). In the Belgian cohort, the prevalence of anti-HCV(+) at (re)start of HD did not change significantly over 1991-2000. The prevalence of anti-HCV(+) in HD has decreased markedly over the last decade in the participating units from most European countries. This decrease should reduce further the risk of nosocomial and occupational HCV infection in HD and ultimately contribute to improved long-term prognosis of HD patients and kidney graft recipients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                NEC
                Nephron Clin Pract
                10.1159/issn.1660-2110
                Nephron Clinical Practice
                S. Karger AG
                1660-2110
                2006
                August 2006
                26 May 2006
                : 104
                : 1
                : c1-c6
                Affiliations
                Servicio de Nefrología, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete, Albacete, España
                Article
                93252 Nephron Clin Pract 2006;104:c1–c6
                10.1159/000093252
                16685138
                © 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 2, References: 23, Pages: 1
                Product
                Self URI (application/pdf): https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/93252
                Categories
                Original Paper

                Comments

                Comment on this article