Marburg haemorrhagic fever
From Wikinfo
Much of the following is from FAQ on CDC website "Questions and Answers About Marburg Hemorrhagic Fever". The Centers for Disease Control is an agency of the government of the United States, thus this material is in the public domain.
Marburg hemorrhagic fever is a rare, severe type of hemorrhagic fever which affects both humans and non-human primates. Caused by a genetically unique zoonotic (that is, animal-borne) RNA virus of the filovirus family, its recognition led to the creation of this virus family. The four species of Ebola virus are the only other known members of the filovirus family. It was in the news in 2005 due to an outbreak in Angola.
Contents |
Discovery
Marburg virus was first recognized in 1967, when outbreaks of hemorrhagic fever occurred simultaneously in laboratories in Marburg and Frankfurt, Germany and in Belgrade, Yugoslavia (now Serbia). A total of 37 people became ill; they included laboratory workers as well as several medical personnel and family members who had cared for them. The first people infected had been exposed to African green monkeys or their tissues. In Marburg, the monkeys had been imported for research and to prepare polio vaccine.
Occurrence
Recorded cases of the disease are rare, and have appeared in only a few locations. While the 1967 outbreak occurred in Europe, the disease agent had arrived with imported monkeys from Uganda. No other case was recorded until 1975, when a traveler most likely exposed in Zimbabwe became ill in Johannesburg, South Africa � and passed the virus to his traveling companion and a nurse. 1980 saw two other cases, one in Western Kenya not far from the Ugandan source of the monkeys implicated in the 1967 outbreak. This patient�s attending physician in Nairobi became the second case. Another human Marburg infection was recognized in 1987 when a young man who had traveled extensively in Kenya, including western Kenya, became ill and later died. In 1998, an outbreak occurred in Durba, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Cases were linked to individuals working in a gold mine. After the outbreak subsided, there were still some sporadic cases that occurred in the region. In the fall of 2004 a major outbreak may have occured among children in [[U�ge, Angola]] in the pediatric ward of the regional hospital; the precise origin is uncertain. But tests for the Marburg virus were negative. In March, 2005 there was a definitive diagnosis and an effort began to contain the outbreak with a focus on the hospital where 14 nurses and 2 doctors had died of the disease. At least 200 people have been infected with most dying within a week with symptoms of vomiting, diarrhea, high fever and bleeding.
Location
Marburg virus is indigenous to Africa. While the geographic area to which it is native is unknown, this area appears to include at least parts of Uganda and Western Kenya, and perhaps Zimbabwe. As with Ebola virus, the actual animal host for Marburg virus also remains a mystery. Both of the men infected in 1980 in western Kenya had traveled extensively, including making a visit to a cave, in that region. The cave was investigated by placing sentinels animals inside to see if they would become infected, and by taking samples from numerous animals and arthropods trapped during the investigation. The investigation yielded no virus. The sentinel animals remained healthy and no virus isolations from the samples obtained have been reported.
Infection
Just how the animal host first transmits Marburg virus to humans is unknown. However, as with some other viruses which cause viral hemorrhagic fever, humans who become ill with Marburg hemorrhagic fever may spread the virus to other people. This may happen in several ways. Persons who have handled infected monkeys and have come in direct contact with their fluids or cell cultures, have become infected. Spread of the virus between humans has occurred in a setting of close contact, often in a hospital. Droplets of body fluids, or direct contact with persons, equipment, or other objects contaminated with infectious blood or tissues are all highly suspect as sources of disease.
Symptoms and diagnosis
After an incubation period of 5-10 days, the onset of the disease is sudden and is marked by fever, chills, headache, and myalgia. Around the fifth day after the onset of symptoms, a maculopapular rash, most prominent on the trunk (chest, back, stomach), may occur. Nausea, vomiting, chest pain, a sore throat, abdominal pain, and diarrhea then may appear. Symptoms become increasingly severe and may include jaundice, inflammation of the pancreas, severe weight loss, delirium, shock, liver failure, and multi-organ dysfunction.
Because many of the signs and symptoms of Marburg hemorrhagic fever are similar to those of other infectious diseases, such as malaria or typhoid fever, diagnosis of the disease can be difficult, especially if only a single case is involved.
Antigen-capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing, IgM-capture ELISA, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and virus isolation can be used to confirm a case of Marburg hemorrhagic fever within a few days of the onset of symptoms. The IgG-capture ELISA is appropriate for testing persons later in the course of disease or after recovery. The disease is readily diagnosed by immunohistochemistry, virus isolation, or PCR of blood or tissue specimens from deceased patients.
Complications
Recovery from Marburg hemorrhagic fever may be prolonged and accompanied by orchititis, recurrent hepatitis, transverse myelitis or uvetis. Other possible complications include inflammation of the testis, spinal cord, eye, parotid gland, or by prolonged hepatitis.
Rate of death
The case-fatality rate for Marburg hemorrhagic fever is between 23-25%; 95% during the Angolan outbreak in 2004-2005.
Treatment
A specific treatment for this disease is unknown. However, supportive hospital therapy should be utilized. This includes balancing the patient�s fluids and electrolytes, maintaining their oxygen status and blood pressure, replacing lost blood and clotting factors and treating them for any complicating infections.
Sometimes treatment also has used transfusion of fresh-frozen plasma and other preparations to replace the blood proteins important in clotting. One controversial treatment is the use of heparin (which blocks clotting) to prevent the consumption of clotting factors. Some researchers believe the consumption of clotting factors is part of the disease process.
Risk of infection
People who have close contact with a human or non-human primate infected with the virus are at risk. Such persons include laboratory or quarantine facility workers who handle non-human primates that have been associated with the disease. In addition, hospital staff and family members who care for patients with the disease are at risk if they do not use proper barrier nursing techniques.
Prevention
Due to our limited knowledge of the disease, preventive measures against transmission from the original animal host have not yet been established. Measures for prevention of secondary transmission are similar to those used for other hemorrhagic fevers. If a patient is either suspected or confirmed to have Marburg hemorrhagic fever, barrier nursing techniques should be used to prevent direct physical contact with the patient. These precautions include wearing of protective gowns, gloves, and masks; placing the infected individual in strict isolation; and sterilization or proper disposal of needles, equipment, and patient excretions.
In conjunction with the World Health Organization, CDC has developed practical, hospital-based guidelines, titled Infection Control for Viral Haemorrhagic Fevers In the African Health Care Setting. The manual can help health-care facilities recognize cases and prevent further hospital-based disease transmission using locally available materials and few financial resources.
Prognosis
Marburg hemorrhagic fever is a very rare human disease. However, when it does occur, it has the potential to spread to other people, especially health care staff and family members who care for the patient. Therefore, increasing awareness among health-care providers of clinical symptoms in patients that suggest Marburg hemorrhagic fever is critical. Better awareness can help lead to taking precautions against the spread of virus infection to family members or health-care providers. Improving the use of diagnostic tools is another priority. With modern means of transportation that give access even to remote areas, it is possible to obtain rapid testing of samples in disease control centers equipped with Biosafety Level 4 laboratories in order to confirm or rule out Marburg virus infection.
A fuller understanding of Marburg hemorrhagic fever will not be possible until the ecology and identity of the virus reservoir are established. In addition, the impact of the disease will remain unknown until the actual incidence of the disease and its endemic areas are determined.
Suggested Reading
Bausch DG, Matthias B, Grein T, et al. Risk Factors for Marburg Hemorrhagic Fever, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9(12):1531-1537
CDC. Notice to Readers Update: Management of Patients with Suspected Viral Hemorrhagic Fever United States. MMWR 1995;44(25):475-479
