Clusters of Hantavirus Infection, Southern Argentina

• Autores: Lazaro, María Ester; Cantoni, Gustavo; Calanni, Liliana; Resa, Amanda J.; Herrero, Eduardo; Iacono, Marisa A.; Enria, Delia; Cappa, Stella M. González
• Año de publicación: 2007
• Idioma: inglés
• Tipo de recurso: artículo
• Fuente: Emerging Infectious Diseases, 2007, 13(1), 104-110.
• Materia: Hantavirus; Infecciones por Hantavirus; Argentina
• Institución: Administración Nacional de Laboratorios e Institutos de Salud "Dr. Carlos G. Malbrán"

Fil: Lazaro, María Ester. Hospital Zonal Bariloche; Rio Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Cantoni, Gustavo. Unidad Regional de Epidemiología y Salud Ambienta; Rio Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Calanni, Liliana. Hospital Castro Rendón; Neuquén, Argentina.
Fil: Resa, Amanda J. Hospital de área El Bolsón; Rio Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Herrero, Eduardo. Unidad Regional de Epidemiología y Salud Ambienta; Rio Negro, Argentina.
Fil: Iacono, Marisa A. Hospital Castro Rendón; Neuquen, Argentina.
Fil: Enria, Delia. ANLIS Dr.C.G.Malbrán. Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Virales Humanas; Argentina.
Fil: Cappa, Stella M. González. Universidad de Buenos Aires; Argentina.
Person-to-person transmission of a hantavirus was first confirmed during a 1996 outbreak of hantavirus pul- monary syndrome in southern Argentina, where Andes virus is endemic. To identify other episodes of secondary transmission, we reviewed reports of 51 cases of han- tavirus infection from this region (November 1993–June 2005). Nine clusters involving 20 cases (39.2%) were found. Two patients, who had symptoms 3 weeks after they shared risks for rodent exposure, were considered a clus- ter. The other 8 clusters each began with an index case, which was almost always fatal, followed 19–40 days later by the illness of at least 1 person who had close and pro- longed contact with the index case-patient. Person-to-per- son transmission was considered the probable source of these 8 clusters. The probability of initiating secondary cases was 41% for patients who died versus 4% for those who survived (p = 0.005). Interpersonal transmission of Andes virus infection should be considered even when rodent exposure cannot be definitively excluded.