Abstract
Background:
Human toxocariasis, a helminthozoonosis, is due to the migration of Toxocara species larvae into human organisms. Humans, especially children become infected by ingesting of embryonated eggs from soil, dirty hands, and raw vegetables. Seroprevalence of this infection is high in developed countries, especially in rural areas. The aim of this study was to investigate the seroepidemiology of Toxocariasis in children referred to the pediatric clinic of Imam Hossein hospital, Isfahan, Iran.
Methods:
In this cross sectional study the sera of children aged 5 to 15 years old, admitted to Imam Hossein Pediatric Hospital were collected during 2013–14. Then the sera were examined for anti Toxocara canis antibodies using commercial ELISA kit.
Results:
From 427 children, 196 (45.9%) were female and 231(54.1%) were male. 107(25.1%) were from rural and 320 (74.9%) were from urban area. Of them 129 (30.2%) were contacted with dog. One child (0.2%) had hypereosinophilia, 33 (7.7%) eosinophlia, and 6 (1.39%) were positive for T. canis IgG (two male and four female). Four of infected children with T. canis were from urban (1.25%) and two from rural areas (1.9%). There was no significant correlation between education of parents, gender, age, place of living and contact with dog with ELISA results test.
Conclusion:
Toxocariasis is prevalent in the children of Isfahan region. Results suggest a low Toxocara exposure in children in this area. Therefore, more risk factors associated with Toxocara exposure should be identified in the further investigation.
Keywords: Toxocariasis, Visceral larva migrans, Seroepidemiology, Children, Iran
Introduction
Toxocariasis is a parasitic infectious disease caused by Toxocara cati or T. canis. These two worms belong to roundworm family. This infection is transmitted from animal to human by ingestion of infective ova and then Toxocara larva will migrate to different tissues (1, 2). One of the major problems of toxocariasis is sever local reactions (1, 3). Toxocariasis has three kinds of clinical presentation: visceral larva migrants (VLM) syndrome, ocular larva migrants (OLM) syndrome and covert toxocariasis. High prevalence of toxocariasis was reported in developing countries especially in rural area (4).
On the other hand, the most involved organs are brain, liver, lung, and eye (1, 3, 5). Chronic cough in children is a relatively common clinical problem (6–8). Toxocariasis may be misdiagnosed as asthma and patients wrongly treated with corticosteroids, which may aggravate the patient. In the most cases, toxocariasis is not very serious and because of low larva burden, most of infected people do not show a special sign of disease. The sever form of disease is rare and commonly seen in children that play with soil contaminated with dog’s feces (2, 4). Nervous toxocariasis is another form of toxocariasis, which has recently been recognized (9–11).
Systemic infection of Toxocara spp. is common in human and it seems that OLM is less common than VLM (2, 12). This parasitic infection is occurs worldwide, and for example, it is estimated that 10000 new cases occurs annually in USA (13). However, no data is available regarding the situation of this parasite in Isfahan.
Therefore, in this study, the seroprevalence of toxocariasis in children referred to the pediatric clinic of Imam Hossein Hospital of Isfahan, Iran using ELISA method was investigated.
Materials and Methods
Serum samples
In this cross – sectional study, 427 sera of children (196 girls and 231 boys) aged between 5 and 15 yr old referred to Imam Hossein hospital of Isfahan from March 2013 until March 2014 were collected. Serum samples were collected and kept at −20 °C for detection of anti toxocariasis antibody using commercial ELISA kit.
CBC (cell blood count) test
For every children CBC test was performed and hyper eosinophilia reported if blood eosinophil was >1000 cell/ml (14). For every individual a questionnaire form containing demographic data, location (urban/rural), education level of parents and contact with dog were filled.
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
Human anti- T. canis IgG antibody was measured using a commercially available ELISA kit IBL (German company) according to the manufacturer’s guidelines. Based on the manufacturer’s instructions, the result was considered positive when a value higher than 11.0 U/ml was recorded.
Statistical analysis
Chi-square test, t-Student test and Spearman Correlation Coefficient were used for statistical analysis. Differences were considered significant if P-values were less than 0.05.
Results
From 427 children referred to the hospital, 196 children (45.9%) were female and 231 (54.1%) were male. 107(25.1%) were lived in rural area and 320(74.9%) in urban area. Overall, 129(30.2%) children were contact with dog.
One child (0.2%) had hypereosinophilia but 33(7.7%) had eosinophlia. Six patients (1.39%) were anti-T.canis IgG positive, which two of them were male (33%) and four were female (67%). Furthermore, four were living in urban and two in rural area. Of these patients, three had eosinophilia and one had hypereosinophilia. Only 2 infected children were contacted with dog. There was no significant relationship between education of parents, gender, age, place of living and contact with dog with ELISA tests results (Table 1).
Table 1: The relationship between age, gender, location, contact with dogs, patient parent’s education, with the ELISA test result in children aged 5–15 years old referred to Imam Hossein hospital in Isfahan, Iran.
| Risk factors | No. (%) of analyzed samples | No. (%) of positive | No. (%) of negative | OR | OR(95%Cl) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | -- | -- | 0.268 | |||
| 5 | 30(7) | 0 | 30(100) | |||
| 6 | 74(17.3) | 0 | 74(100) | |||
| 7 | 50(11.7) | 0 | 50(100) | |||
| 8 | 48(11.2) | 2(4.16) | 46(95.84) | |||
| 9 | 40(9.4) | 1(2.5) | 39(97.5) | |||
| 10 | 52(12.2) | 0 | 52(100) | |||
| 11 | 45(10.5) | 2(4.4) | 43(95.6) | |||
| 12 | 32(7.5) | 0 | 32(100) | |||
| 13 | 21(4.9) | 0 | 21(100) | |||
| 14 | 12(2.8) | 0 | 12(100) | |||
| 15 | 23(5.4) | 1(4.34) | 23(95.66) | |||
| Sex | 0.419 | 0.76<OR<2.314 | 0.3 | |||
| Male | 231(54.1) | 2(0.87) | 229(99.13) | |||
| Female | 196(45.9) | 4(2.05) | 192(97.95) | |||
| Residency | 0.665 | 0.120<OR<3.68 | 0.6 | |||
| Rural | 107(25.1) | 2(1.8) | 105(98.2) | |||
| Urban | 320(74.9) | 4(1.25) | 316(98.75) | |||
| Ownership and contact with dogs | 1.157 | 0.209<OR<6.4 | 0.8 | |||
| Yes | 129(30.2) | 2(1.55) | 127(98.45) | |||
| No | 298(69.8) | 4(1.34) | 294(98.66) | |||
| Parents education | 0.62 | 0.112>OR<3.42 | 0.5 | |||
| High school education | 237(55.5) | 4(1.68) | 233(98.32) | |||
| University education | 190(44.5) | 2(1.05) | 188(98.95) |
The CBC tests showed a normal count of WBC in 406 (95.1%) children and 21(4.9%) had high WBC counts. On the other hands, 138 (32.3%) children had abnormal RBC count and 289 (67.7%) had normal RBC count. 46(10.8%) and 381(89.2%) children had abnormal and normal platelet count respectively. Correlation between CBC test and ELISA test are presented in the Table 2.
Table 2: Relationship “between” the Cell blood count with the Elisa test result in children aged 5–15 years old referred to Imam Hossein hospital Isfahan, Iran.
| CBC&diff | No. (%) of analysed samples | No. (%) of positive | No. (%) of negative | OR | OR(95%Cl) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WBC | 4.01 | 0.447<OR<35.956 | 0.37 | |||
| Normal | 406(95.1) | 5(4.39) | 401(95.61) | |||
| Higher than normal | 21(4.9) | 1(4.76) | 20(95.24) | |||
| Neutrophil | 0.095 | 0.016<OR<0.549 | 0.001 | |||
| Abnormal | 21(4.9) | 2(9.5) | 19(90.5) | |||
| Normal | 406(95.1) | 4(0.98) | 402(99.02) | |||
| Lymphocyte | 0.047 | 0.009<OR<0.25 | 0.001 | |||
| Abnormal | 22(5.2) | 3(13.63) | 19(86.37) | |||
| Normal | 405(94.8) | 3(0.74) | 402(99.26) | |||
| RBC | 0.233 | 0.042<OR<1.29 | 0.07 | |||
| Abnormal | 138(32.3) | 4(2.8) | 134(97.2) | |||
| Normal | 289(67.7) | 2(0.69) | 287(99.31) | |||
| Platelet | 0.233 | 0.042<OR<1.311 | 0.135 | |||
| Abnormal | 46(10.8) | 2(4.34) | 44(95.66) | |||
| Normal | 381(89.2) | 4(1.04) | 377(98.96) | |||
| Eosinophil | 26.06 | 4.587<OR<148.143 | 0.001 | |||
| Normal Eosinophilia | 393(92.03) | 2(0.5) | 391(99.5) | |||
| 34(7.97) | 4(11.76) | 30(88.24) |
Discussion
Seroepidemiological surveys shows that toxocariasis exists worldwide. Worm infections are common in developing countries and some reports declared high frequency of human infection by toxocara larva (15, 16).
Different prevalence of Toxocara infection was reported in various countries as 3%–86% (17). In this study, 6 (1.39%) of 427 children were seropositive for toxocariasis. 37.12% of individuals were seropositive in general population of the Amazonian City, and any information about contact with dog or cat was reported (18). In Hamadan City, out of 544 children (aged 1–9 yr), 5.3% were positive for toxocariasis.
However, they did not investigate the correlation between contact with dog and cat and infection seropositivity (19). 20.2% of rural and 30.1% of urban children in Fars Province were infected with toxocariasis (20). Recently Sharif et al. reported that 25% of schoolchildren between 7–14 yr age in Northern Iran were seropositive. They reported a significant correlation between contact with dog and seroprevalence of toxocariasis (21).
Malla et al., reported 6.4% seropositivity in rural area among individuals with no clinical signs and 23.3% seropositivity in individuals with clinical signs. No significant correlation was reported between contact with dog and Toxocara infection (22). Fan et al. reported a prevalence of 76.6% for toxocariasis among 7–12 yr old students in Taiwan. They showed a significant correlation between histories of raising dogs and seropositivity (23). Ajayi et al. from Nigeria reported 30% seropositivity among individuals aged 2–21 yr old. They showed that dog’s ownership was not an important factor for Toxocara infection (24). In another study, 4.8% of healthy blood donors and 1.2% of children were infected (25).
Alavi et al. showed that 2% in children were seropositive (26). This prevalence is very similar to what we found in Isfahan. Based on the various studies, prevalence of toxocariasis is different in various societies and it may be related to difference in climate, culture and religion. In our study there was not a significant correlation between dog contact and seropositivity (P value=0.8). In addition, correlation between gender and seropositivity was not significant (P value = 0.3). In previous studies no statistically significant correlations between gender and age with prevalence of toxocariasis were seen (20, 23, 24, 26).
In our study two infected children were living in rural and four in urban and correlation between places of living with seropositivity was not statistically significant (P value = 0.6). In contrast to our finding, Sadjjadi et al. reported a significant correlation between places of living with seropositivity, however similar to our finding; Alavi et al. did not found statistically significant correlation (20, 26). There is controversial reports regarding the relationship between keeping dog, prevalence of toxocariasis is in different investigation, and most of them found a similar finding to ours.
Compatible to our findings, studies in Brazil and Ahvaz did not report any significant correlation between eosinophilia and toxocariasis (15, 26) but one study in Argentina reported a significant correlation in this regard (27).
In different studies in Iran such as our study, no correlation was seen between parents educational and prevalence of toxocariasis. Probably previous exposure to infection agents such as various species of Toxocara could be the reason for raised titer of antibody in these children. In this study beside eosinophil, other blood cell such as neutrophil and lymphocyte were surveyed and the correlation with seropositive individuals was significant. Based on the information more study is recommended to understand the correlation of more factor with seropositivity.
Conclusion
Toxocariasis is prevalent in the children of Isfahan region. Results suggest a low Toxocara exposure in children in this area. Therefore, more risk factors associated with Toxocara exposure should be identified in the further investigation.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by grants from Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.
References
- 1. Gillespie S, Pearson RD. Principle and practice of clinical parasitology. 1st ed West sussex: John Wiley & Sons; 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 2. Arfaa F. Medical helminthology. 7th ed Tehran: Nashredibaj; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 3. Overgaauw PA, Nederland V. Aspects of Toxocara epidemiology: human toxocarosis. Crit Rev Microbiol. 1997; 23 (3): 215– 31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Muller R. Worms and human disease. 2nd ed Wallingford: CABI publishing; 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 5. MacLean J, Graeme-Cook F. Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Weekly clinicopathological exercises. Case 12-2002. A 50-year-old man with eosinophilia and fluctuating hepatic lesions. N Engl J Med. 2002; 346 (16): 1232– 9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Aguiar-Santos AM, Andrade LD, Medeiros Z, Chieffi PP, Lescano SZ, Perez EP. Human toxocariasis: frequency of anti-Toxocara antibodies in children and adolescents from an outpatient clinic for lymphatic filariasis in Recife, Northeast Brazil. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2004; 46 (2): 81– 5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Alavi SM, Sefidgaran G. Frequency of anti Toxocara antibodies in school children with chronic cough and eosinophilia in Ahwaz, Iran. Pak J Med Sci. 2008; 6 (8): 360– 3. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Azizi F, Hatami H, Janghorbani M. Epidemiology and control of common Diseases in Iran. 1st ed Tehran: Ministry of Health Publications; 1998. [Google Scholar]
- 9. Fenoy S, Cuellar C, Guillen J. Seroprevalence of toxocariasis in children and adults in Madrid and Tenerife, Spain. J Helminthol. 1996; 70 (2): 109– 14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. LS G. Diagnostic Medical Parasitology. 4 th ed Washington: ASM Press; 2001. [Google Scholar]
- 11. Moore T, McCarthy J. Toxocariasis and larva migrans syndromes. 2nd ed Philadelphia: Elsevier Inc; 2006. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Magnaval J-F, Glickman LT, Dorchies P, Morassin B. Highlights of human toxocariasis. Korean J Parasitol. 2001; 39 (1): 1– 11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Quattrocchi G, Nicoletti A, Marin B, Bruno E, Druet-Cabanac M, Preux P-M. Toxocariasis and epilepsy: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012; 6 (8): 1– 10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Weller P. Trichinella and other tissue nematodes. Harrisons Principles Int Med. 2005; 16 (1): 1253. [Google Scholar]
- 15. Anaruma Filho F, Chieffi PP, Correa CRS, Camargo ED, Silveira EP, ARANHA JJB, et al. Human toxocariasis: a seroepidemiological survey in the municipality of Campinas (SP), Brazil. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2002; 44 (6): 303– 7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Rubinsky-Elefant G, Hirata C, Yamamoto J, Ferreira M. Human toxocariasis: diagnosis, worldwide seroprevalences and clinical expression of the systemic and ocular forms. Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 2010; 104 (1): 3– 23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Alderete J, Jacob C, Pastorino AC, Elefant GR, Castro AP, Fomin AB, et al. Prevalence of Toxocara infection in schoolchildren from the Butantã region, São Paulo, Brazil. Mem Inst. Oswaldo Cruz. 2003; 98 (5): 593– 7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Roldán WH, Cavero YA, Espinoza YA, Jiménez S, Gutiérrez CA. Human toxocariasis: a seroepidemiological survey in the Amazonian city of Yurimaguas, Peru. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2010; 52 (1): 37– 42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Fallah M, Azimi A, Taherkhani H. Seroprevalence of toxocariasis in children aged 1–9 years in western Islamic Republic of Iran, 2003. East Mediterr Health J. 2007; 13 (5): 1073– 7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Sadjjadi S, Khosravi M, Mehrabani D, Oryan A. Seroprevalence of Toxocara infection in school children in Shiraz, Southern Iran. J Trop Pediatr. 2000; 46 (6): 327– 30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Sharif M, Daryani A, Barzegar G, Nasrolahei M, Khalilian A. Seroprevalence of toxocariasis in schoolchildren in Northern Iran. Pak J Biol Sci. 2010; 13 (4): 180– 4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Malla N, Aggarwal A, Mahajan R. A serological study of human toxocariasis in north India. Natl Med J India. 2002; 15 (3): 145– 7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Fan CK, Hung CC, Du WY, Liao CW, Su KE. Seroepidemiology of Toxocara canis infection among mountain aboriginal schoolchildren living in contaminated districts in eastern Taiwan. Trop Med Int Health. 2004; 9 (12): 1312– 8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Ajayi O, Duhlinska D, Agwale SM, Njoku M. Frequency of human toxocariasis in Jos, Plateau state, Nigeria. Mem Inst. Oswaldo Cruz. 2000; 95 (2): 147– 9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Kimmig P, Naser K, Frank W. Seroepidemiologic studies of human toxocariasis. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 1991; 191 (4): 406– 22. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Alavi SM, Hosseini SA, Rahdar M, Salmanzadeh SH, Nikkhuy AR. Determination of Seroprevalence Rate of Toxocara canis in 6–15 years Aged Rural and Urban School Children in Ahvaz, Iran. Sci Med J. 2011; 10: 406– 22. [Google Scholar]
- 27. Alonso JM, Bojanich MV, Chamorro M, Gorodner JO. Toxocara seroprevalence in children from a subtropical city in Argentina. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2000; 42 (4): 235– 7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]