| Title |
Early treatment failure in concurrent dengue and mixed malaria species infection with suspected resistance to artemisinin combination therapy from a tertiary care center in Delhi: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Medical Case Reports Journal, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/imcrj.s139729 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rushika Saksena, Monika Matlani, Vineeta Singh, Amit Kumar, Anupam Anveshi, Dilip Kumar, Rajni Gaind |
| Abstract |
Concurrent dengue and mixed malaria infections in a single patient present with overlapping clinical manifestations which pose a diagnostic challenge and management dilemma in areas of common endemicities. We report a case of a young male who tested positive for both Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum along with dengue infection. He showed signs of early treatment failure to artemisinin combination therapy (artesunate with sulfadoxine+pyrimethamine). Molecular analysis for the drug resistance genes viz: chloroquine resistance (pfcrt), multidrug resistance (pfmdr-1), sulfadoxine (pfdhps), pyrimethamine (pfdhfr), and artemisinin resistance (keltch 13) was performed. A rise in parasitemia from <2% to 5% was observed after 3 days of treatment. Mutations in pfcrt, pfmdr-1, pfdhfr, and pfdhps genes were detected as a possible cause of treatment failure. Increased severity, overlapping symptoms, and suspected resistance to treatment warrants a multidimensional diagnostic approach and diligent therapeutic monitoring. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,079,280
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from International Medical Case Reports Journal
#129
of 375 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,021
of 317,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Medical Case Reports Journal
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 375 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.