Evidence Hub

Detection of enteric pathogens in young children before and during acute gastroenteritis: results from a prospective German birth cohort study (LoewenKIDS)

Chiara Lincetto, F. Romero-Saavedra, D. Laverde, Riccardo Lincetto, M. Meyer-Buehn, Bianca Klee, C. Gottschick, R. Mikolajczyk et al.

Infection, 2025

89 participants

Abstract

To identify enteric pathogens in pediatric acute gastroenteritis (AGE) and assess their etiological relevance by comparison with samples during asymptomatic period. Children 3 loose stools and/or one vomiting in 24 h. Intraindividual pairs of symptomatic and preceding asymptomatic samples for each child were analyzed for 25 enteric pathogens via multiplex real-time RT-PCR. Enteric viruses were detected in 64% (57/89) of symptomatic samples and significantly associated with gastrointestinal symptoms (Odds Ratio [OR] 3.9; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 2.1–7.3). The most common viruses in AGE were norovirus (Genogroups GI and GII) (36%, 32/89) and adenovirus (27%, 24/89). Bacteria were detected in 46% (41/89) of symptomatic samples and 43% (38/89) of asymptomatic ones, with no association to symptoms (OR 1.1; 95% CI 0.6-2). The most common bacteria in AGE were Enteropathogenic Escherichia coli (28%, 25/89) and Clostridium difficile (16%, 14/89). Dientamoeba fragilis was the only detected parasite in AGE (7%, 6/89), and was not associated with symptoms (OR 1.4; 95% CI 0.4–5.5). Pathogen loads in symptomatic and asymptomatic pairs correlated with symptoms for norovirus GII, astrovirus and sapovirus (each p < 0.01), but not for other pathogens. This study supports the clinical significance of detection of viral pathogens in young children with acute gastroenteritis and without relevant comorbidities in high-income countries, but limits the significance of enteric bacterial and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 89 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free