Background The western area of the province of Almeria, sited in southern Spain, has one of the highest immigrant population rates in Spain, mainly dedicated to agricultural work. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the number of cases of imported malaria associated with migrants from countries belonging to sub-Saharan Africa. The objective of our study is to describe the epidemiological, clinical and analytical characteristics of malaria patients treated in a specialized tropical unit, paying special attention to the differences between VFR and non-VFR migrants and also to the peculiarities of microscopic malaria cases compared to submicroscopic ones. Methods Retrospective observational study of migrants over 14 years of age with imported malaria treated from October 2004 to May 2019. Characteristics of VFR and non-VFR migrants were compared. Malaria cases were divided into microscopic malaria (MM) and submicroscopic malaria (SMM). SMM was defined as the presence of a positive malaria PCR test together with a negative direct microscopic examination and a negative rapid diagnostic test (RDT). Microscopic malaria was defined as the presence of a positive RDT and/or a positive smear examination. Results Three hundred thirty-six cases of malaria were diagnosed, 329 in sub-Saharan immigrants. Of these, 78.1% were VFR migrants, in whom MM predominated (85.2% of cases). In non-VFR migrants, SMM represented 72.2% of the cases. Overall, 239 (72.6%) patients presented MM and 90 (27.4%) SMM. Fever was the most frequent clinical manifestation (64.4%), mainly in the MM group (MM: 81.1% vs SMM: 20.0%; p < 0.01). The most frequent species was P. falciparum. Patients with SMM presented fewer cytopenias and a greater number of coinfections due to soil-transmitted helminths, filarial and intestinal protozoa compared to patients with MM. Conclusions Imported malaria in our area is closely related to sub-Saharan migration. VFR migrants are the main risk group, highlighting the need for actions aimed at improving disease prevention measures. On the other hand, almost a third of the cases are due to SMM. This fact could justify its systematic screening, at least for those travelers at greater risk. Graphic Abstract

No abstract

Schistosomiasis is a neglected tropical disease despite of being a major public health problem affecting nearly 240 million people in the world. Due to the migratory flow from endemic countries to Western countries, an increasing number of cases is being diagnosed in non-endemic areas, generally in migrants or people visiting these areas. Serology is the recommended method for screening and diagnosis of schistosomiasis in migrants from endemic regions. However, serological techniques have a highly variable sensitivity. The aim of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the sensitivity of three different serological tests used in real clinical practice for the screening and diagnosis of imported schistosomiasis in sub-Saharan migrant patients, using the detection of schistosome eggs in urine, faeces or tissues as the gold standard. We evaluated three different serological techniques in 405 sub-Saharan patients with confirmed schistosomiasis treated between 2004 and 2022: an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), an indirect haemagglutination assay (IHA) and an immunochromatographic test (ICT). The overall sensitivity values obtained with the different techniques were: 44.4% for IHA, 71.2% for ELISA and 94.7% for ICT, respectively. According to species, ICT showed the highest sensitivity (S. haematobium: 94%, S. mansoni: 93.3%; and S. intercalatum/guineensis: 100%). In conclusion, our study shows that Schistosoma ICT has the best performance in real clinical practice, when compared to ELISA and IHA, in both S. mansoni and S. haematobium infections.

It is not known whether sequential outpatient parenteral antimicrobial (OPAT) is as safe and effective as conventional hospitalization in patients with S. aureus bacteremia (SAB). A post-hoc analysis of the comparative effectiveness of conventional hospitalization versus sequential OPAT was performed in two prospective Spanish cohorts of patients with S. aureus bacteremia. The PROBAC cohort is a national, multicenter, prospective observational cohort of patients diagnosed in 22 Spanish hospitals between October 2016 and March 2017. The DOMUS OPAT cohort is a prospective observational cohort including patients from two university hospitals in Seville, Spain from 2012 to 2021. Multivariate regression was performed, including a propensity score (PS) for receiving OPAT, stratified analysis according to PS quartiles, and matched pair analyses based on PS. Four hundred and thirteen patients were included in the analysis: 150 in sequential OPAT and 263 in the full hospitalization therapy group. In multivariate analysis, including PS and center effect as covariates, 60-day treatment failure was lower in the OPAT group than in the full hospitalization group (p < 0.001; OR 0.275, 95%CI 0.129–0.584). In the PS-based matched analyses, sequential treatment under OPAT was not associated with higher 60-day treatment failure (p = 0.253; adjusted OR 0.660; % CI 0.324–1.345). OPAT is a safe and effective alternative to conventional in-patient therapy for completion of treatment in well-selected patients with SAB, mainly those associated with a low-risk source and without end-stage kidney disease.

No abstract