Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Pharyngeal carriers of Neisseria meningitidis and N. lactamica in childhood].

Authors: B, Taracena; J L, Montón; P, Cristóbal; J, Casal; A, Sanz; J R, Domínguez;

[Pharyngeal carriers of Neisseria meningitidis and N. lactamica in childhood].

Abstract

A prospective study was undertaken with the purpose of finding out the proportion of pharyngeal carriers of N. meningitidis and N. lactamica among our infantile school population. Seven groups constituted by, approximately, 200 infants each, were studied along two years. Samples were taken in two different schools, for each each group, at a period of average incidence (February, April, June and October). Infants were between five and six years of age and made a total of 1,315 individuals, which we consider representative of our school infantile population. Positivity for N. lactamica was around 20%, whereas 10% of infants were carriers of N. meningitidis. Among the latter 56% were group B, 15% group Y, 5% group A and 20% agglutinated spontaneously. The remainder fell into several serogroups (10 unclassifiable, six 29E and one each, X, W135 and Z). Concerning group B serotypes, except for 22 not typable cases, most carriers were serotype 2, while the remainder were distributed in seven other serotypes. These findings are comparable to those seen in the population with clinical disease. However the number of carriers remained constant and, in contrast to what happened with clinical patients, was unrelated to seasonal variations. Resistance of N. meningitidis to chemotherapy was the following: sulfadiazine 100%, ampicillin 19%, rifampicin 20% and penicillin 0%. The latter can not be considered a good choice in prophylaxis.

Keywords

Male, Oropharynx, Drug Resistance, Microbial, Neisseria meningitidis, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Meningococcal Infections, Child, Preschool, Carrier State, Humans, Female, Prospective Studies, Child, Neisseria

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!