Dergiler / Annals of Medical Research / 2022 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 5

Retrospective evaluation of gastrointestinal system infections: Investigation of viral, bacterial, and parasitic etiological agents

Sayfa
458–462
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Still, the overall positivity rates were low due to the good infrastructure of our city and the successful execution of sanitation measures.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aim: We aimed to retrospectively investigate the viral, bacterial, and parasitic etiological agents detected in patients to present with gastrointestinal complaints and examine their distribution in our region.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Materials and Methods: Patients who presented to the XXX Hospital due to gastrointestinal symptoms between January 2017 and December 2019 were included in the study.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Still, the overall positivity rates were low due to the good infrastructure of our city and the successful execution of sanitation measures.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2017 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Aim: We aimed to retrospectively investigate the viral, bacterial, and parasitic etiological agents detected in patients to present with gastrointestinal complaints and examine their distribution in our region. Materials and Methods: Patients who presented to the XXX Hospital due to gastrointestinal symptoms between January 2017 and December 2019 were included in the study. The results obtained using conventional culture and immunochromatographic (IC) methods from the stool samples of the patients for etiological diagnosis in the microbiology laboratory were retrospectively evaluated. The infectious etiological agents were analyzed according to the age groups. Clinical and epidemiologic characteristics of the agents have been described. Results: The positivity rates were 6.6%, 2.2%, and 0.4% for Rotavirus (RV), Adenovirus (AV), and Norovirus (NV); 0.8%, 2.8%, and 0.4% for Salmonella spp., Helicobacter pylori, and Clostridium difficile; and 2.1% and 1.1% for Entamoeba histolytica and Cryptosporidium spp., respectively. Shigella spp. and Giardia intestinalis were not detected in any of the samples. The highest positivity rates in the 0–2, 3–10 and 11–20 age groups were found for RV, whereas in the 21–40, 41-60 and > 60 age groups were determined for H. pylori. RV infections were observed predominantly in the spring. Conclusion: IC methods are a helpful tool for the routine diagnosis of gastrointestinal infections at hospitals. The agent with the highest positivity rate was RV. Still, the overall positivity rates were low due to the good infrastructure of our city and the successful execution of sanitation measures.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ATİK, T. K., DURAN, A., DURAN, A. Ç., YILDIRIM, D. Ö. (2022). Retrospective evaluation of gastrointestinal system infections: Investigation of viral, bacterial, and parasitic etiological agents. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 5, 458–462. https://ajindex.com/articles/445640

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Bányai K, Estes MK, Martella V, Parashar UD. Viral gastroenteritis. Lancet. 2018;392(10142):175-86
  2. González-Serranoa L, Muñoz-Algarrab M, González-Sanz R, et al. Viral gastroenteritis in hospitalized patients: Evaluation of immunochromatographic methods for rapid detection in stool samples. J Clin Virol. 2020;128:104420
  3. Kann S, Bruennert D, Hansen J, et al. High prevalence of intestinal pathogens in indigenous in Colombia. J Clin Med. 2020;9:2786
  4. Barutçu A, Barutçu S. Frequency of rotavirus and enteric adenovirus in children with acute gastroenteritis in Halfeti district, Sanliurfa, Turkey. Cukurova Med J. 2020;45(2):448-54
  5. Oğuztürk H, Eren ŞH, Korkmaz İ, Kukul Güven FM. Prevalence of microorganisms in patients presented with gastroenteritis to the emergency department. Turk J Emerg Med. 2008;8(3):114- 20
  6. Farkas T, Jiang XI. Rotaviruses, caliciviruses, astroviruses, enteric adenoviruses and other diarrheic viruses. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Jorgensen JH, Landry ML, Pfaller MA (eds). Manual of Clinical Micriobiology. 9th ed. Washington DC: ASM Press, 2007:1453-69
  7. GBD Diarrhoeal Diseases Collaborators. Estimates of global, regional, and national morbidity, mortality, and aetiologies of diarrhoeal diseases: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(9):909-48
  8. Tapisiz A, Bedir Demirdag T, Cura Yayla BC, et al. Rotavirus infections in children in Turkey: A systematic review. Rev Med Virol. 2019;29(1):e2020
  9. Aytaç Ö, Şenol FF, Öner P, et al. Rotavirus and adenovirus frequency in acute gastroenteric diseases. Turk Hij Den Biyol Derg. 2020;77(2):179-84
  10. Gülbudak H, Kurnaz N, Tezcan-Ülger S, et al. The investigation of rotavirus and adenovirus frequency among patients with acute gastroenteritis Turk Hij Den Biyol Derg. 2020;77(2):185-94
  11. Arslan A, Çiçek C, Aksoylar S, et al. Investigation of Rotavirus and Norovirus frequency in patients with acute diarrhea. FLORA. 2019;24(2):113-8. 12. http://www.who.int/wer/2013/wer8805.pdf. Rotavirus vaccines. WHO position paper 2013;88:49-64
  12. Vural A, Akçalı A, Ünver A, Tatman Otkun M. Evaluation of the stool samples submitted to microbiology laboratory of Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Research and Education Hospital. International Journal of Clinical Research. 2013;1(1):14-6
  13. Maçin S, Kaya F, Ergüven S, Akyön Y. Microbiological evaluation of an acute gastroenteritis outbreak. Cukurova Med J. 2017;42(4):617-22