Identification of pregnancies at risk from cytomegalovirus infection

Silva, L. M. de; Kampfner, G. L.; Lister, C. M.; Tobin, J. O'h.

doi:10.1017/s0022172400053183

Cited by 19 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 12 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recurrent as well as primary infection during pregnancy can affect the fetus [Stagno et al, 1977, 19821, but primary infection is the principal cause of fetal damage [Fowler et al, 19921. In Western countries, including the UK, 0.3-0.5% of babies are born infected with CMV [De Silva et al, 1977;Stern and Tucker, 1973;Ahlfors et al, 19841. Most of these cases are the consequence of primary infection in the mother, which crosses the placenta in 20-50% of cases [Griffiths and Baboonian, 1984;Kumar et al, 19841.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lymphocyte responses and virus excretion as risk factors for intrauterine infection with cytomegalovirus

Fernando¹,

Pearce²,

Booth³

1993

Journal of Medical Virology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Serological screening of pregnant women in this and a previous study identified 28 cases of primary infection with cytomegalovirus, 7 (25%) of whom transmitted the infection to their fetuses. Risk factors for intrauterine infection were: 1) age less than 20 years, 2) Caucasian rather than non-Caucasian race, 3) a weak response to cytomegalovirus antigen in the lymphocyte transformation test, and 4) the excretion of cytomegalovirus in the urine. The greatest risk was when a weak lymphoproliferative response was detected in combination with a positive result for virus isolation, in which case the chance of fetal infection was 83%. Despite these associations, there was one important anomalous result of a woman who demonstrated a strong lymphocyte response during pregnancy and a negative result for virus isolation, but who gave birth to an infected baby who developed unilateral hearing loss.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lymphocyte responses and virus excretion as risk factors for intrauterine infection with cytomegalovirus

Fernando¹,

Pearce²,

Booth³

1993

Journal of Medical Virology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The blood donor CMV status was determined by immunofluorescence (IF) (de Silva et al, 1977) for 52 of the 64 babies. 21 babies received blood from at least one CMV antibody-positive donor and 8 (38%) became infected, while the 31 babies who received only CMV antibody-free blood remained uninfected.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For CMV antibody determination we used the IF antibody test (de Silva et al, 1977) as it is more sensitive than the complement-fixation (CF) test and quicker to perform, a result being obtained in 2 hours as opposed to the overnight incubation required for the CF test. Our results using this IF test in exchange transfused babies indicates that it is satisfactory for blood screening.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The retrospective group were seen at least once between ages 10 weeks and 14 months, at which time the babies were physically examined and their development, head circumferences, and hearing were assessed. Blood for CMV complementfixation tests and immunofluorescent antibody (de Silva et al, 1977) was taken from both mother and baby, and a throat swab and urine were taken from the baby for virus isolation on human embryo fibroblast cultures. In the prospective group blood was taken from the mother within 2 weeks after transfusion of the baby, and a throat swab and urine were collected from the baby for virus culture within 3 days of transfusion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cytomegalovirus and blood transfusion in neonates.

Benson¹,

Bodden²,

Tobin³

1979

Archives of Disease in Childhood

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These data suggest that detection of CMV IgM in the mother is another risk factor for fetal infection, but its precise meaning was not clarified. DeSilva et al (1977) followed 1065 unmarried pregnant women in Manchester, England and identified 24 with specific lgM antibodies by IF in their sera; of these, 17 were followed to term. As in the report of , separate objective definitions of primary and secondary CMV infection were inadequate, and the sensitivy and specificity of the test could not be determined.…”

Section: Immunagiobulin M Studies In Pregnant Mothersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cytomegalovirus

1991

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All rights reserved 90-14345 CIP No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher Preface to the First EditionAlthough there are a number of excellent current reviews on one or another aspect of cytomegalovirus, the last comprehensive treatment of this subject was that of Krech et al. (197la). In view of the amazing advances in the virological, epidemiologic, and clinical knowledge of cytomegaloviruses, an up-to-date book is needed. Such a work should cover many areas of expertise and a voluminous technical literature. Each area might have been reviewed and analyzed by workers more expert than myself. However, I have embarked on the entire venture alone in order to attain unity and continuity in this book, characteristics that are not easily achieved in the more popular multiauthored works. I have tried to review the Iiterature and provide a critical summary for each area discussed. To do this, I provide as much of the primary data of the relevant works as needed and not just the qualitative conclusions. Inevitably, the flow of the narrative may be interrupted by dry facts and figures. However, such information is essential to make this a meaningful reference work. But for those not interested in such details, I have provided at what I hope are crucial points critiques and summaries.This book is not an exhaustive review of all the literature. This is probably no Ionger possible or even desirable. By selection, however, one runs the risk of having missed or ignored important papers. I am keenly aware of this, and I wish to apologize for such oversight, if that is possible.I visualize this work as being useful for physicians, scientists, and students interested in the biology of and infection by human cytomegalovirus. I feel that to understand these, the basic virology of this virus and related herpesviruses must be included. Topics that have not advanced a great deal and that are adequately described in available works, such as the anatomic pathology, have not been reviewed in detail. The emphasis has been placed on newer insights in the virology, immunology, serology, epidemiology, and especially clinical aspects of human cytomegalovirus. I wish tobring out the interactions of knowledge in these areas. Part II is a much shorter treatment of the nonhuman cytomegaloviruses, reviewed primarily from the point of view of their contribution to the understanding of the human virus. V vi Preface to the First Edition Finally, I wish to thank Drs. Charles R. Rinaldo, Jr., John A. Armstrong, and Donald N. Medearis for their critical review of the manuscript. Their suggestions were invaluable. Dr. John N. Dowling's thorough review of CMV infection in patients with malignancies was the basis of Section 13.4. I also acknowledge the indispensable and patient secretarial assistance of Ms.The remarkable medical events and advances in knowle...

show abstract

Identification of pregnancies at risk from cytomegalovirus infection

Cited by 19 publications

References 12 publications

Lymphocyte responses and virus excretion as risk factors for intrauterine infection with cytomegalovirus

Lymphocyte responses and virus excretion as risk factors for intrauterine infection with cytomegalovirus

Cytomegalovirus and blood transfusion in neonates.

Cytomegalovirus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About