An Epidemiologic Investigation of a Case of Acute Hepatitis E.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is considered a zoonotic infection in developed nations. A case of acute hepatitis E in a researcher following a scalpel injury while working on a pig prompted a seroepidemiologic study to identify potential modes of transmission and determine the seroprevalence of HEV among animal handlers at the institute. Sera from personnel (n = 64) in two animal facilities and age/sex-matched blood donors (n = 63) as controls were tested for IgG anti-HEV and, if positive, for IgM anti-HEV and HEV RNA. Sera and stool from pigs aged 6 to 12 weeks from the breeding farm and older pigs from animal facilities were tested similarly. The median age of personnel was 36 years, 74% were white, 56% were male, and 74% had direct exposure to pigs. The prevalence of anti-HEV was 3.1% among personnel compared to 3.2% among blood donors; none were positive for IgM anti-HEV or HEV RNA. IgG anti-HEV was detected in sera from 10% of pigs aged 6 to 8 weeks, 80% aged 10 weeks, 100% aged 12 weeks, and 76% aged >12 weeks. HEV RNA was detected in stool but not sera from three 12-week-old pigs. Sequencing revealed HEV genotype 3 with ∼10% difference between the patient and pig sequences. Parenteral transmission is a potential mode of acute HEV infection. The low and similar seroprevalence of anti-HEV between the at-risk group and age-matched blood donors suggests low transmission risk with universal precautions among animal handlers.

An assessment of hepatitis E virus (HEV) in US blood donors and recipients: no detectable HEV RNA in 1939 donors tested and no evidence for HEV transmission to 362 prospectively followed recipients.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection has become relevant to blood transfusion practice because isolated cases of blood transmission have been reported and because HEV has been found to cause chronic infection and severe liver disease in immunocompromised patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We tested for immunoglobulin (Ig)G and IgM antibodies to the HEV and for HEV RNA in 1939 unselected volunteer US blood donors. Subsequently, we tested the same variables in pre- and serial posttransfusion samples from 362 prospectively followed blood recipients to assess transfusion risk. RESULTS: IgG anti-HEV seroprevalence in the total 1939 donations was 18.8%: 916 of these donations were made in 2006 at which time the seroprevalence was 21.8% and the remaining 1023 donations were in 2012 when the seroprevalence had decreased to 16.0% (p < 0.01). A significant (p < 0.001) stepwise increase in anti-HEV seroprevalence was seen with increasing age. Eight of 1939 donations (0.4%) tested anti-HEV IgM positive; no donation was HEV RNA positive. Two recipients had an apparent anti-HEV seroconversion, but temporal relationships and linked donor testing showed that these were not transfusion-transmitted HEV infections. CONCLUSION: No transfusion-transmitted HEV infections were observed in 362 prospectively followed blood recipients despite an anti-HEV seroprevalence among donations exceeding 16%.

Parvovirus B19 infection transmitted by transfusion of red blood cells confirmed by molecular analysis of linked donor and recipient samples.

BACKGROUND: Extremely high viremic levels of parvovirus B19 (B19V) can be found in acutely infected, but asymptomatic donors. However, reports of transmission by single-donor blood components are rare. In this prospective study, paired donor-recipient samples were used to investigate the transfusion risk. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Posttransfusion plasma or blood samples from recipients were tested for B19V DNA by polymerase chain reaction, generally at 4 and 8 weeks, and for anti-B19V immunoglobulin (Ig)G by enzyme immunoassay, at 12 and 24 weeks. To rule out infection unrelated to transfusion, pretransfusion samples and linked donor's samples for each B19V DNA-positive recipient were assayed for B19V DNA and anti-B19V IgG and IgM. To confirm transmission, sequencing and phylogenetic analysis were performed. RESULTS: A total of 14 of 869 (1.6%) recipients were B19V DNA positive, but only 1 of 869 (0.12%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0029%-0.6409%) was negative for B19V DNA and anti-B19V IgG before transfusion and seroconverted posttransfusion. This newly infected patient received 5 × 10(10) IU B19V DNA in one red blood cell (RBC) unit from an acutely infected anti-B19V-negative donor in addition to RBCs from three other donors that cumulatively contained 1320 IU of anti-B19V IgG. DNA sequencing and phylogenetic analysis showed that sequences from the linked donor and recipient were identical (Genotype 1), thus establishing transfusion transmission. CONCLUSIONS: The 0.12% transmission rate documented here, although low, could nonetheless result in hundreds or thousands of infections annually in the United States based on calculated confidence limits. Although most would be asymptomatic, some could have severe clinical outcomes, especially in neonates and those with immunocompromised or hemolytic states.