3.9 Article

Human Bocavirus in Patients with Respiratory Tract Infection

Journal

KOREAN JOURNAL OF LABORATORY MEDICINE
Volume 31, Issue 3, Pages 179-184

Publisher

KOREAN SOC LABORATORY MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.179

Keywords

Bocavirus; Respiratory tract infections; Viral load

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Human bocavirus (HBoV) is a newly identified viral pathogen, and its clinical epidemiology and significance in respiratory infections have not yet been completely elucidated. We investigated the prevalence of HBoV infection and the association between viral (HBoV) load and clinical features of the infection in patients of all age-groups. Methods: Nasopharyngeal aspirates from patients with symptoms of respiratory infection were tested for presence of HBoV by using real-time polymerase chain reaction. HBoV-positive patients were categorized into low- and high-viral-load groups using 1.0 x 10(6) copies/mL as the threshold value of viral load. Results: Detection rate of HBoV was 4.8% (N=93) in a total of 1,926 samples with peak incidence of infection being observed in patients aged 6-12 months. HBoV infection was more frequently observed in young children, especially, in children aged less than 5 yr, and the HBoV load decreased with increase in age. HBoV was codetected with other respiratory viruses in 17(183%) of the 93 HBoV-positive patients and 15 patients (88.2%) belonged to the low-viral-load group. Patients infected with HBoV alone showed a higher viral load than those patients in whom HBoV was codetected with other respiratory viruses (median load, 3.78 x 10(5) copies/mL vs. 1.94 x 10(4) copies/mL, P = 0.014). Higher pulse rate (P = 0.007) and respiratory rate (P = 0.021) were observed in patients with a high-viral-load. Conclusions: Our results suggest that HBoV may be the causative agent of respiratory infection in the high-viral-load group.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available