Ileal Perforation and Enteric Fever: Implications for Burden of Disease Estimation.

BACKGROUND: Ileal perforation occurs in about 1% of enteric fevers as a complication, with a case fatality risk (CFR) of 20%-30% in the early 1990s that decreased to 15.4% in 2011 in South East Asia. We report nontraumatic ileal perforations and its associated CFR from a 2-year prospective enteric fever surveillance across India. METHODS: The Surveillance for Enteric Fever in India (SEFI) project established a multitiered surveillance system for enteric fever between December 2017 and March 2020. Nontraumatic ileal perforations were surveilled at 8 tertiary care and 6 secondary care hospitals and classified according to etiology. RESULTS: Of the 158 nontraumatic ileal perforation cases identified,126 were consented and enrolled. Enteric fever (34.7%), tuberculosis (19.0%), malignancy (5.8%), and perforation of Meckel diverticulum (4.9%) were the common etiology. In those with enteric fever ileal perforation, the CFR was 7.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Enteric fever remains the most common cause of nontraumatic ileal perforation in India, followed by tuberculosis. Better modalities of establishing etiology are required to classify the illness, and frame management guidelines and preventive measures. CFR data are critical for comprehensive disease burden estimation and policymaking.

Cost of Illness Due to Severe Enteric Fever in India.

BACKGROUND: Lack of robust data on economic burden due to enteric fever in India has made decision making on typhoid vaccination a challenge. Surveillance for Enteric Fever network was established to address gaps in typhoid disease and economic burden. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with blood culture-confirmed enteric fever and nontraumatic ileal perforation were identified at 14 hospitals. These sites represent urban referral hospitals (tier 3) and smaller hospitals in urban slums, remote rural, and tribal settings (tier 2). Cost of illness and productivity loss data from onset to 28 days after discharge from hospital were collected using a structured questionnaire. The direct and indirect costs of an illness episode were analyzed by type of setting. RESULTS: In total, 274 patients from tier 2 surveillance, 891 patients from tier 3 surveillance, and 110 ileal perforation patients provided the cost of illness data. The mean direct cost of severe enteric fever was US$119.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], US$85.8-152.4) in tier 2 and US$405.7 (95% CI, 366.9-444.4) in tier 3; 16.9% of patients in tier 3 experienced catastrophic expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of treating enteric fever is considerable and likely to increase with emerging antimicrobial resistance. Equitable preventive strategies are urgently needed.