A pilot study on CD4 & CD8 cell counts in healthy HIV seronegative pregnant women.

CD4 and CD8 counts are widely used prognostic markers to assess the degree of immune impairment in HIV seropositive individuals and to monitor anti-retroviral therapy (ART). Pregnancy is considered as a physiologically immunocompromised state, hence alterations in T lymphocyte subsets may occur during pregnancy. There is a need to establish base-line values of these counts, especially in healthy pregnant women. One hundred healthy HIV seronegative pregnant women (mean age 22.5 +/- 2.99 yr) in their third trimester of pregnancy and 30 non-pregnant women (mean age 22.7 +/- 3.01 yr) were tested for their CD4 and CDS counts. In pregnant women, the CD4 and CD8 cell counts/microl were 764 +/- 249 and 547 +/- 196 and the CD4 and CD8 per cent were 56.49 +/- 8.3 and 38.03 +/- 7.2 respectively. In the non-pregnant women CD4 and CD8 counts/microl were 965 +/- 267 and 639 +/- 211 whereas the CD4 and CD8 per cent were 55.27 +/- 5.99 and 36.17 +/- 6.44 respectively. Absolute counts were significantly lower (P < 0.05) in the pregnant group as compared to the controls. A wide variation was seen in the CD4 and CD8 counts in both the groups. However, the variations in the mean CD4 and CD8 per cent were much smaller. Thus CD4 and CD8 per cent may be considered as a useful indicator of immune function rather than absolute counts, in pregnant women.

Detection of antibodies to Brucella abortus in animal handlers.

1. Our study showed a prevalence of 5.33% in animal handlers working in an urban city like Pune. The prevalence would definitely be higher in a population from a rural area. 2. All these cases who showed presence of antibodies to B. abortus, had varied clinical manifestations, characteristic of the protean manifestations in brucellosis. Likewise in our study we had cases ranging from arthritis, abortions and genito urinary manifestations. 3. All the antibody positive cases had significant antibody titres. The clinicians miss many cases of brucellosis because it is not considered as an alternative diagnosis. The clinician should keep in mind the possibility of an occupational or environmental exposure in cases of P.U.O. It would also be worthwhile to create awareness of the disease in such professions so that necessary precautions and periodic screening of such occupationally exposed people can be done. Studies are needed to assess the role of brucellosis as a cause of morbidity in India, which had not received the attention it deserved. Prevention of human brucellosis focuses mainly on elimination of infection in cattle along with hygiene, vaccine, and effective heating and pasteurization of dairy products and related foods.