Prevalence and burden of dengue infection in Europe: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

Summary Imported dengue cases are thought to be important source for transmission of autochthonous dengue in Europe. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of dengue in Europe, its severity, and factors associated with it. Out of 5287 reports resulting from the search of nine electronic search engines, we included 174 reports. Meta‐analysis was performed by pooling the event rate and 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup meta‐analyses were performed to test the effect of the covariates. Among 20 284 reported cases, 130 autochthonous dengue cases were reported in eight countries with the highest number of cases reported in Israel (n = 41). The highest number of imported dengue cases was in Germany (n = 6638) then France (n = 6610). Most cases were imported from Southeast Asia (n = 2533) especially Thailand. Dengue infection cases increased with time, with 4157 cases reported in 2010. Second dengue infection and dengue serotype 2 were positively associated with dengue severity. The proportion of autochthonous dengue infection increased with time to reach 14.8% (95% CI, 7.6‐26.9) in 2015. The pooled proportion of severe dengue was 6.18% (95% CI, 2.7‐13.3). The United Kingdom and France had the highest rate of severe dengue (25%; 95% CI, 6.3‐62.3, and 21.4%; 95% CI, 24.5‐18.7, respectively). This change may be due to the surveillance efforts instead of true biological phenomenon; thus, the lack of surveillance is an obvious limitation. In conclusion, imported and autochthonous dengue has been increasing in Europe. Severe dengue began to increase recently in Europe. European health authorities should pay more attention for the diagnosis and control of dengue infection among returning travelers, especially the travelers with fever of unknown origin.

Data-driven methods for dengue prediction and surveillance using real-world and Big Data: A systematic review

“…However, recent systematic reviews only examined the relevance and usefulness of Internet-based surveillance systems in emerging tropical disease management [8,14], and they did not focus specifically on dengue management. Furthermore, recent systematic reviews on dengue analyzed monitoring [15], vaccine efficacy [16], epidemiological trends [17,18], the overall disease burden [19][20][21] and clinical prognosis models [22], but they did not discuss these new methods to improve dengue management.…”

Evaluation of VIDAS® Diagnostic Assay Prototypes Detecting Dengue Virus NS1 Antigen and Anti-Dengue Virus IgM and IgG Antibodies

“…With an estimated 390 million annual infections in 2010, of which 96 million are with clinical manifestations, dengue is a major public health burden, notably in tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world [ 2 , 3 ]. Its incidence dramatically increased in the last 50 years in these regions and has recently begun to increase in Europe [ 1 , 3 , 4 ]. Dengue is a systemic and progressive disease with symptoms ranging from mild to severe [ 1 , 3 ].…”

Evaluation of VIDAS® diagnostic assay prototypes detecting dengue virus NS1 antigen and anti-dengue virus IgM and IgG antibodies

“…2,3 Its incidence dramatically increased in the last 50 years in these regions and has recently begun to increase in Europe. 1,3,4 Dengue is a systemic and progressive disease with symptoms ranging from mild to severe. 1,3 Following an early febrile phase that lasts for 2 to 7 days, patients enter a critical phase during which patients’ condition either improves or worsens, and may evolve into life-threatening severe dengue, with a potentially fatal outcome.…”

“…With an estimated 390 million annual infections in 2010, of which 96 million with clinical manifestations, dengue is a major public health burden, notably in tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world [2,3]. Its incidence dramatically increased in the last 50 years in these regions and has recently begun to increase in Europe [1,3,4]. Dengue is a systemic and progressive disease with symptoms ranging from mild to severe [1,3].…”