The face of Ebola changing frequency of haemorrhage in the West African compared with Eastern Central African outbreaks
Citation: Petti S, Messano GA, Vingolo EM, Marsella LT, Scully C. The face of Ebola: changing frequency of haemorrhage in the West African compared with Eastern-Central African outbreaks. BMC infectious diseases. 2015 Dec;15(1):564.
Summary: The West-African (WA) Zaire Ebola virus outbreak had a significantly higher number of deaths compared to the outbreak in Easter-Central African (ECA) outbreaks. The increased survival rates are explained in the context of great humanitarian efforts. Previous work also suggests that the long human-to-human transmission cycle occurred in WA, which gave rise to human adaptation and consequent immune escape. This systematic review offers support for the human adaptation hypothesis by providing data that indicates a smaller proportion of Ebola virus patients with haemorrhage in the WA outbreaks compared to the ECA outbreaks.
This systematic review compared the relative frequencies of three typical Ebola virus haemorrhagic symptoms: conjunctival, nasal, and gingival bleedings in the Eastern-Central African and West-African outbreaks. Fifteen studies were included, of which 10 related to ECA and 5 to WA. 4,867 patients were identified with conjunctival bleeding, 3,859 with nasal bleeding, and 4,278 with gingival bleeding.
Disclaimer: This summary has been written by staff and volunteers of Evidence Aid in order to make the content of the original document accessible to decision makers who are searching for the available evidence on Ebola but may not have the time, initially, to read the original report in full. This summary is not intended as a substitute for the medical advice of physicians, other health workers, professional associations, guideline developers, or national governments and international agencies. If readers of this summary think that the evidence that is presented within it is relevant to their decision-making they should refer to the content and details of the original article, and the advice and guidelines offered by other sources of expertise, before making decisions. Evidence Aid cannot be held responsible for any decisions made about Ebola on the basis of this summary alone.
If you have found this summary helpful, please consider making a donation. If everyone who looked at our COVID-19 resources gave us just £2 per month, it would fund Evidence Aid’s life-saving work.