Pathogenic microorganisms in ticks removed from Slovakian residents over the years 2008-2018.

Autor: Špitalská E; Institute of Virology, Biomedical Research Center, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 05, Bratislava, Slovak Republic. Electronic address: eva.spitalska@savba.sk., Boldišová E; Institute of Virology, Biomedical Research Center, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 05, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Štefanidesová K; Institute of Virology, Biomedical Research Center, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 05, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Kocianová E; Institute of Virology, Biomedical Research Center, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 05, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Majerčíková Z; Institute of Virology, Biomedical Research Center, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 05, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Tarageľová VR; Institute of Zoology Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 06, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Selyemová D; Institute of Zoology Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 06, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Chvostáč M; Institute of Zoology Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 06, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Derdáková M; Institute of Zoology Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 06, Bratislava, Slovak Republic., Škultéty Ľ; Institute of Virology, Biomedical Research Center, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravska cesta 9, 845 05, Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Ticks and tick-borne diseases [Ticks Tick Borne Dis] 2021 Mar; Vol. 12 (2), pp. 101626. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Dec 13.
DOI: 10.1016/j.ttbdis.2020.101626
Abstrakt: A total of 750 ticks feeding on humans were collected during the years 2008-2018. The majority of ticks (94.8 %) came from Slovakia, with 3.5 % from the Czech Republic, 0.9 % from Austria, and 0.3 % from Hungary. Travellers from Ukraine, Croatia, France, and Cuba also brought one tick from each of these countries. The majority of the analysed ticks were identified as Ixodes ricinus (94.3 %). Dermacentor reticulatus (0.93 %), Haemaphysalis concinna (0.1 %), Haemaphysalis sp. (0.1 %), Ixodes arboricola (0.1 %), and Rhipicephalus sp. (0.1 %) were also encountered. The most frequently found stage of I. ricinus was the nymph (69.9 %) followed by adult females (20.4 %) and larvae (8.3 %). Ticks were predominantly found on children younger than 10 years (46.3 %) and adults between 30-39 years (21.4 %). In children younger than 10 years, the ticks were usually found on the head, while in other age categories, the ticks were predominantly attached to legs. Ticks were further individually analysed for the presence of Rickettsia spp., Coxiella burnetii, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Neoehrlichia mikurensis, Bartonella spp. and Babesia spp. The overall prevalences of tick-borne bacteria assessed in I. ricinus ticks acquired in Slovakia were: rickettsiae 25.0 % (95 % CI: 21.7-28.2), B. burgdorferi s.l. 20.5 % (95 % CI: 17.4-23.5), A. phagocytophilum 13.5 % (95 % CI: 10.9-16.0), Babesia spp. 5.2 % (95 % CI: 3.5-6.9), C. burnetii 3.0 % (95 % CI: 1.5-4.6), and N. mikurensis 4.4 % (95 % CI: 2.0-6.8). Pathogenic species Rickettsia raoultii, Rickettsia helvetica, Rickettsia monacensis, A. phagocytophilum, Borrelia garinii, Borrelia afzelii, Borrelia valaisiana, Babesia microti, and Babesia divergens were identified in D. reticulatus and I. ricinus ticks.
(Copyright © 2020 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: