PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12744848

Hepatitis A: post-exposure prophylaxis.

Gloria Taliani·Giovanni Battista Gaeta
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We report on the findings of an exploratory review of evidence published in English from 1945 to identify the best post-exposure prophylaxis treatment and the longest acceptable interval after exposure for prophylaxis to be effective. We found no evidence that post-exposure administration of currently available immunoglobulins is effective in preventing hepatitis A infection and disease. The use of immunoglobulins for immunoprophylaxis should not be widely recommended until a systematic review of the evidence has been conducted. We recommend that active immunization to secondary contacts of exposed and vaccinated subjects be offered.

Explore related subjects

Environmental ExposureHepatitis AHepatitis A VaccinesHumansJournal ArticleSystematic Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gloria Taliani, Giovanni Battista Gaeta. 2003-06-02. Hepatitis A: post-exposure prophylaxis.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0264-410x(03)00138-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Naphthalene--an environmental and occupational toxicant.

For many years naphthalene had been considered as a non-carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH). Airborne naphthalene concentrations have always been observed to be below the limit values of various national committees, such as the threshold limit value (TLV) of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and the MAK of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (10 ppm). Since 2000, when the US National Toxicology Program revealed clear evidence of the carcinogenic activity of naphthalene in rats, international agencies [the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), DFG] have reclassified naphthalene as a potential human carcinogen, and the European Union (EU) is currently preparing a new risk assessment report. It is presently unknown how to protect humans from health risks resulting from occupational and environmental naphthalene exposure. Knowledge about the external and internal exposure of humans serves as the key determinant in a comprehensive risk assessment. We review here ambient monitoring studies concerning the external naphthalene exposure that results from ubiquitous environmental sources (indoor and outdoor air, water, soil, food) and from a variety of critical workplaces (coking plants, creosote impregnation, distillation of coal tar and naphthalene, manufacture of refractories, graphite electrodes, aluminium and mothballs). Based on results of ambient monitoring studies published so far, a new hygiene-based exposure limit of 1.5 mg naphthalene per cubic metre of air (0.3 ppm) is proposed. Furthermore, results from biological monitoring studies are summarised in this article. The internal burden was almost exclusively determined by means of the urinary metabolites 1-naphthol and 2-naphthol, but it is currently not possible for one to evaluate a biological tolerance level (BAT) or a biological exposure index (BEI). Based on the toxicokinetics and metabolism of naphthalene, the central question on its carcinogenicity is briefly sketched. Naphthoquinones play an important role in this context. Their adducts with macromolecules may be the parameters of choice for the estimation of effects to human health.

Environmental Exposure↗
PubMed2003

Prioritisation of veterinary medicines in the UK environment.

A wide range of veterinary medicines is used to treat animals in the UK. Whilst the environmental impact of selected substances (particulary the sheep dip chemicals, anthelmintics and fish farm chemicals) has been well studied, limited information is available in the public domain on the other groups of substances (e.g. antifungals, coccidiostats, antiprotozoals, hormones and growth promoters). There is therefore a need to identify other substances that may impact the environment in order to design national monitoring programmes, target experimental work and develop pollution prevention methodologies. In this study, a simple two-stage prioritisation scheme was developed and applied to veterinary medicines in use in the UK. In the first stage, those substances that have high potential to enter the environment in significant amounts were identified on the basis of amounts used in the UK, treatment type and metabolism. In stage 2, the hazard of the identified substances to terrestrial and aquatic organisms was assessed. Using the approach, a total of 56 substances or groups were assigned to a 'high priority' category. For eleven of these substances, sufficient data were available to characterise their risk, these were: oxytetracycline, chlortetracycline, tetracycline, sulphadiazine, amoxicillin, diazinon, tylosin, dihydrostreptomycin, apramycin, cypermethrin and sarafloxicin. For the remaining 45 substances, full datasets were not available and it is recommended that in the first instance, attempts are made to fill these data gaps.

Environmental Exposure↗