Email this article 
Hepatitis G virus exposure in dialysis patients and blood donors in Isfahan‑Iran
Abstract
Background: Hepatitis G virus (HGV) is transmitted mainly by parenteral route and patients on maintenance hemodialysis (HD) are at risk for this infection. This study was conducted to estimate prevalence of infection through the presence of anti‑HGV and to evaluate the clinical significance of HGV envelope protein E2 (anti‑E2) in HD patients in compare with volunteer blood donors in Isfahan‑Iran.
Methods: In a cross‑sectional study, a total of 40 HD patients as cases and 40 healthy volunteer blood donors as negative controls were selected randomly in summer 2008. The epidemiological data were obtained in all subjects, and duration of HD was obtained in HD patients as well. All samples were tested for anti‑E2 antibodies, hepatitis C virus (HCV)‑antibody and hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HBs‑Ag) by an enzyme‑linked immunosorbent assay and a recombinant immunoblot assay was employed to confirm anti‑HCV reactivity. Student’s t‑test, Chi‑square test or Fisher exact test was used for data analysis and P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
Results: Ten of the 40 HD patients tested positive for anti‑E2 (25%) and of 40 voluntary blood donors, 10 (5%) were positive for anti‑E2 (P = 0.012). Anti‑HCV antibodies and HBs‑Ag were found in 4 and 1 HD patients, respectively. In anti‑E2‑positive patients, co‑infection with HCV or hepatitis B virus was not significant. Furthermore, the mean duration of hemodialysis in anti‑E2 positive and anti‑E2 negative patients did not have significant differences.
Conclusions: HD patients are at increased risk of HGV infection in Isfahan‑Iran. Since hepatitis G is a good predictor for parenteral transmission, it is suggested to test all of the blood for transfusion for HGV infection.
Keywords: Hepatitis G, hemodialysis, Isfahan
Methods: In a cross‑sectional study, a total of 40 HD patients as cases and 40 healthy volunteer blood donors as negative controls were selected randomly in summer 2008. The epidemiological data were obtained in all subjects, and duration of HD was obtained in HD patients as well. All samples were tested for anti‑E2 antibodies, hepatitis C virus (HCV)‑antibody and hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HBs‑Ag) by an enzyme‑linked immunosorbent assay and a recombinant immunoblot assay was employed to confirm anti‑HCV reactivity. Student’s t‑test, Chi‑square test or Fisher exact test was used for data analysis and P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
Results: Ten of the 40 HD patients tested positive for anti‑E2 (25%) and of 40 voluntary blood donors, 10 (5%) were positive for anti‑E2 (P = 0.012). Anti‑HCV antibodies and HBs‑Ag were found in 4 and 1 HD patients, respectively. In anti‑E2‑positive patients, co‑infection with HCV or hepatitis B virus was not significant. Furthermore, the mean duration of hemodialysis in anti‑E2 positive and anti‑E2 negative patients did not have significant differences.
Conclusions: HD patients are at increased risk of HGV infection in Isfahan‑Iran. Since hepatitis G is a good predictor for parenteral transmission, it is suggested to test all of the blood for transfusion for HGV infection.
Keywords: Hepatitis G, hemodialysis, Isfahan