Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection is responsible for more than half of acute viral hepatitis (AHV) with high feto-maternal complications. Bangladesh has high prevalence of HEV infection among pregnant women. This study was undertaken to observe fetal -maternal outcome of HEV infection in Bangladeshi pregnant women . For this purpose a total of 56 pregnant women with AVH were enrolled from two tertiary care hospitals of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Blood samples were collected and tested for HEV Ig-M, HBsAg and Anti HCV.Thirty one pregnant women were tested positive for HEV Ig-M, acted as case and rest 25 women had viral hepatitis other than HEV, acted as control group (non-HEV). Among the HEV infected pregnant women, 38.7% of the patients (12/31) were aged between 21-25 years with mean age of 23.7 + SD 4.5 years. Twelve (39%) AVH-E patient died due to fulminant hepatic failure (FHF), hepatic encephalopathy (HFE) and multiorgan dysfunction. Maternal mortality due to HEV was greater [ (RR), 9.6; 95% CI, 1.3 to 69.5] in HEV-infected women than in non-HEV infected women and it was higher in 2nd trimester (55.5%) then the 1st and 3rd trimester of pregnancy. Babies born to pregnant women with acute Hepatitis due to HEV (AHV-E) were more likely to have intrauterine death (RR 18.68; p = 0.03) and preterm delivery (RR 7.25; p = 0.05) than the non-HEV infected pregnant women. Only 23% (7/31) babies reached up to term maturity. In conclusion, his study reveals that comparing with non-HEV infection, pregnant women with AHV-E infection causes worse feto-maternal outcomes especially in the second trimester of pregnancy which needs special attention of healthcare providers to reduce bad obstetric outcome in HEV endemic countries.

No abstract

Background: Mislabeled specimens are one of the most common pre-analytic errors in a histopathology laboratory. As histopathology provides the final diagnosis for most of the diseases, labeling errors can lead to serious consequences leading to wrong treatments. Objectives: This study was carried out to find common pre-analytical errors of histopathology laboratory in the context of our country. Methods: Data were collected on six points of container labeling and nine points of requisition papers through simple check list over a period of one week. Results: Among 142 samples, labeling was found in 82.40% container. Among these labels, patients name, age, hospital registration number of the patients were absent in 19.01%, 26.06% and 90.85% samples respectively. Site of origin of the tissue in the container was absent in 71.83% samples. About 4.93% samples came to the laboratory without fixatives. Patients name, age, sex, site of origin of tissue, name of the referring physician and their contact numbers were found absent in 0.70%, 3.52%, 33.10%, 7.75%, 50% and 95.77% of requisition papers respectively. Clinical diagnosis was absent in 54.23% cases. A good proportion of container and requisition papers did not contain proper labeling, which is important not only for identification but also for histopathological diagnosis. Conclusion: We believe that, these errors occur due to lack of standard histopathology requisition form. Association of Surgeons and Pathologists can collaboratively form a standard requisition form for sending histopathology samples to different laboratories, which could easily reduce mislabeling errors in histopathology. Journal of Surgical Sciences (2013) Vol. 17 (2) :80-83