Search

Background: It is predicted that approximately two billion tourist trips to foreign countries will be taken worldwide each year by 2030. Germany has long been among the most active countries in tourism. The frequency of illness among persons returning from developing and newly industrialized countries is 43-79%. The appropriate diagnosis of fever in returning travelers is a clinically important matter, as it can be a sign of a life-threatening illness. Methods: This review is based on publications (2001-2022) retrieved by a selective search in PubMed for studies on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of febrile illnesses in returning travelers, or on specific tropical diseases. Results: Diarrhea, fever, and skin changes are the most common manifestations of disease after travel to tropical and sub - tropical areas. The diagnostic evaluation should be performed in a series of steps, beginning with a precise travel history and the identification of specific risk factors. Among travelers returning from sub-Saharan Africa, Plasmodium falciparum malaria is the most common cause of fever on presentation to centers for infectious diseases and tropical medicine, affecting approximately 50 per 1000 travelers. Among persons returning from travel to Southeast Asia, dengue fever is the most common infectious disease, affecting 50-160 per 1000 travelers. Further potentially dangerous diseases include chikungunya and zika fever, typhoid and paratyphoid fever, amoebic liver abscess, visceral leishmaniasis (kala-azar), leptospirosis, and, very rarely, imported cases of viral hemorrhagic fever. COVID-19 and influenza are important differential diagnoses. Conclusion: The differential diagnosis can be narrowed by thorough history-taking with particular attention to the patient's travel route, combined with a good knowledge of the geographic spread and incubation times of the main tropical diseases. Algorithms help clinicians to focus the diagnostic work-up and select the appropriate further laboratory tests and diagnostic procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Questions on poisoning by plants are a common reason for inquiries to poison information centers (PIC). Over the years 2011--2020, plant poisoning was the subject of 15% of all inquiries to the joint poison information center in Erfurt, Germany (Gemeinsames Giftinformationszentrum Erfurt, GGIZ) that concerned poisoning in children (2.3% in adults). In this patient collective, plant poisoning occupied third place after medical drugs (32%) and chemical substances (24%), and was a more common subject of inquiry than mushroom poisoning (1.5%). Methods: This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective literature search in PubMed/TOXLINE on plant poisoning and on 12 epidemiologically and toxicologically relevant domestic species of poisonous plants in risk categories 2 and 3 (up to 2021). Results: Medical personnel should have basic toxicological knowledge of the following highly poisonous plants: wolfsbane (aconitum), belladonna, angel's trumpet, cowbane (cicuta virosa), autumn crocus, hemlock, jimson weed, henbane, castor bean (ricinus), false hellebore, foxglove (digitalis), and European yew. The intoxication is evaluated on the basis of a structured history (the "w" questions) and the clinical manifestations (e.g., toxidromes). Special analysis is generally not readily available and often expensive and time-consuming. In case of poisoning, a poison information center should be contacted for plant identification, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations. Specimens of plant components and vomit should be obtained, if pos - sible, for further testing. Measures for the elimination of the poisonous substance may be indicated after a risk--benefit analysis. Specific antidotes are available for only a few types of plant poisoning, e.g., physostigmine for tropane alkaloid poisoning or digitalis antibodies for foxglove poisoning. The treatment is usually symptomatic and only rarely evidence-based. Individualized medical surveillance is recommended after the ingestion of large or unknown quantities of poisonous plant components. Conclusion: The clinician should be able to recognize dangerous domestic species of poisonous plants, take appropriate initial measures, and avoid overdiagnosis and overtreatment. To improve patient care, systematic epidemiological and clinical studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]