Dergiler / Annals of Medical Research / 2021 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 6

Evaluation of the relationship between human brucellosisand pregnancy loss

Sayfa
1194–2000
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)

C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, aspartateaminotransferase, abortus, and parity were significantly high in women who experienced pregnancy loss (p

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aim: Brucellosis is a zoonotic infection caused by bacteria of the genus Brucella.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Materials and Methods: The study was conducted in the Clinic of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in GaziantepUniversity Hospital between August 2012-June 2013.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, aspartateaminotransferase, abortus, and parity were significantly high in women who experienced pregnancy loss (p
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2012 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Aim: Brucellosis is a zoonotic infection caused by bacteria of the genus Brucella. The disease causes genitourinary systeminvolvement and abortion, which is the most critical complication of the disease, in cattle. Although it is known to cause spontaneousabortion, preterm birth and intrauterine death in humans, the number of systematic studies on the subject is limited. This studycompared the patients who experienced pregnancy loss and women who carried their pregnancy to term without any problems interms of serology for brucellosis in our region which is an endemic region. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted in the Clinic of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in GaziantepUniversity Hospital between August 2012-June 2013. The study was conducted with 71 patients who experienced intrauterinepregnancy loss and 109 women who carried their pregnancy to term without any problems as the control group, wherein all subjectswere aged between 18 and 40. These two groups were in a similar age group and had a similar gestational age. Results: There were 4 (5,6%) subjects who were brucella-positive in the patient group and 1 (0,9%) subjects who were brucella positive in the control group according to the serology for brucellosis. C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, aspartateaminotransferase, abortus, and parity were significantly high in women who experienced pregnancy loss (p

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

METE, A. Ö., UĞUR, M. G., NAMIDURU, M., KARAOĞLAN, İ., UĞUR, B. K. (2022). Evaluation of the relationship between human brucellosisand pregnancy loss. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 6, 1194–2000. https://ajindex.com/articles/446014

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Greenfield RA, Drevets DA, Machado LJ, et al. Bacterial pathogens as biological weapons and agents of bioterrorism. Am J Med Sci 2002;323:299-315
  2. Ali MA, James OC, Mohamed AA, et al. Etiologic Agents of Fever of Unknown Origin Among Patients Attending Mnazi Mmoja Hospital, Zanzibar. J Community Health 2020;45:1073-80
  3. Pappas G, Papadimitriou P, Akritidis N, et al. The new global map of human brucellosis. Lancet Infect Dis 2006;6:91-9
  4. Godfroid J, Cloeckaert A, Liautard JP, et al. From the discovery of the Malta fever’s agent to the discovery of a marine mammal reservoir, brucellosis has continuously been a re-emerging zoonosis. Vet Res 2005;36:313-26
  5. Colmenero JD, Reguera JM, Cabrera FP, et al. Serology, clinical manifestations and treatment of brucellosis in diff erent age groups. Infection 1990;18:152-6
  6. Young EJ. Brucella species. In Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R (eds). Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases (7th ed). Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone 2010:2921-5
  7. Mete A, Mete AO, Kimyon S, et al. Unilateral Brucella dacryoadenitis. EurJTher 2018;24:61-3
  8. Hasanjani Roushan MR, Mohrez M, et al. Epidemiological features and clinical manifestations in 469 adult patients with brucellosis in Babol, Northern Iran. Epidemiol Infect 2004;132:1109-14
  9. Baud G, Greub G. Intracellular bacteria and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Clin Microbiol Infect 2011;17: 1312-22 10. Kurdoglu M, Adali E, Kurdoglu Z, et al. Brucellosis in. pregnancy: a 6- year clinical analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2010;281:201-6
  10. Inan A, Erdem H, Elaldi N, et al. Brucellosis in pregnancy: results of multicenter ID-IRI study. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2019;38:1261-8
  11. Elkiran O, Kocak G, Karakurt C, et al. Brucella myocarditis in a 3-month-old: probable transplacental transmission. Ann Trop Paediatr 2010;30:225-8
  12. Corbel MJ. Brucellosis: An overview. Emerg Infect Dis 1997;3:213-21
  13. Yagupsky B, Baron EJ. Laboratory exposures to Brucella and implications for bioterrorism. Emerg Infect Dis 2005;11:1180-5
  14. Texas Animal Health Commission. Brucellosis Eradication Working Group: Report and recommendations to the Texas Animal Health Commission. Presented in Austin 2007
  15. Mantur BG, Amarnath SK, Shinde RS. Review of clinical and laboratory features of human brucellosis. Indian J Med Microbiol 2007;25:188-202
  16. Cetin ET, Coral B, Bilgic A, et al. Determination of the incidence of Human brucellosis in Turkey