Saturday, 8th of May 2010 |
Vincent Corbel
1,2*, Joseph Chabi1,2, Roch D Dabiré3, Josiane Etang4, Philippe Nwane4, Olivier Pigeon5, Martin Akogbeto2, Jean-Marc Hougard63
Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé (IRSS) / Centre Muraz (CM), 01 BP 390, Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso, Tel (+226) 20984147.4
Organisation de Coordination pour la lutte contre les Endémies en Afrique Centrale (OCEAC), BP. 288, Yaoundé, Cameroon, Tel. (+237) 2232232.5
Walloon Agricultural Research Centre (CRA-W), Agriculture and Natural Environment Department, Plant Protection Products and Biocides Physico-chemistry and Residues Unit, Rue du Bordia, 11 B-5030 , Gembloux, Belgium, Tel (+32) 81625262.6
Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), BP 1386 Dakar, République du Sénégal, Tel : (+221) 338498332.*Corresponding author
CV:
vincent.corbel@ird.fr, CJ: joseph.chabi@ird.fr, DKR: dabire_roch@hotmail.com, EJ: josyet@yahoo.frNP:
philino07@yahoo.fr, PO: pigeon@cra.wallonie.be, AM: akogbeto@yahoo.fr. HJM: jean-marc.hougard@ird.frAbstract below; full text at http://www.malariajournal.com/content/pdf/1475-2875-9-113.pdf
Background
Due to the spread of pyrethroid-resistance in malaria vectors in Africa, new strategies and tools are urgently needed to better control malaria transmission. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performances of a new mosaic long-lasting insecticidal net (LLIN), i.e. PermaNet® 3.0, against wild pyrethroid-resistant
Anopheles gambiae s.l. in West and Central Africa.Methods
A multi centre experimental hut trial was conducted in Malanville (Benin), Vallée du Kou (Burkina Faso) and Pitoa (Cameroon) to investigate the exophily, blood feeding inhibition and mortality induced by PermaNet® 3.0 (i.e. a mosaic net containing piperonyl butoxide and deltamethrin on the roof) comparatively to the WHO recommended PermaNet® 2.0 (unwashed and washed 20-times) and a conventionally deltamethrin-treated net (CTN).
Results
The personal protection and insecticidal activity of PermaNet 3.0 and PermaNet® 2.0 were excellent (>80%) in the “pyrethroid-tolerant” area of Malanville. In the pyrethroid-resistance areas of Pitoa (metabolic resistance) and Vallée du Kou (presence of the L104F
kdr mutation), PermaNet® 3.0 showed equal or better performances than PermaNet® 2.0. It should be noted however that the deltamethrin content on PermaNet® 3.0 was up to twice higher than that of PermaNet® 2.0. Significant reduction of efficacy of both LLIN was noted after 20 washes although PermaNet® 3.0 still fulfilled the WHO requirement for LLIN.Conclusion
The use of combination nets for malaria control offers promising prospects. However, further investigations are needed to demonstrate the benefits of using PermaNet® 3.0 for the control of pyrethroid resistant mosquito populations in Africa.
Are three drugs for malaria better than two?
Friday, 24th of April 2020 |
Public health Interventions and epidemic intensity during the 1918 influenza pandemic
Thursday, 16th of April 2020 |
Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as available weapons to fight COVID-19
Tuesday, 17th of March 2020 |
Using models to shape measles control and elimination strategies in low- and middle-income countries: A review of recent applications
Monday, 17th of February 2020 |
Immunization Agenda 2030
Tuesday, 11th of February 2020 |
40756656 |
www.measlesinitiative.org www.technet21.org www.polioeradication.org www.globalhealthlearning.org www.who.int/bulletin allianceformalariaprevention.com www.malariaworld.org http://www.panafrican-med-journal.com/ |