In industrialized areas of the world, including Europe, Hepatitis E Virus (HEV) is considered an emerging pathogen. In fact, autochthonous cases caused by HEV genotype 3 (HEV-3) are increasingly reported. Several studies described the human HEV-3 subtypes and strains circulating in West Europe countries; in contrast, very little is known about the HEV strains responsible for acute hepatitis E in countries of East Europe/Balkans, such as Bulgaria. Anti-HEV IgM positive serum samples (n = 103) from acute hepatitis cases (2013–2015) from all over Bulgaria were analysed for HEV RNA by Real-Time PCR. Viremia was detected in 90/103 samples. A fragment of the viral genome (ORF-2 region) was amplified by nested PCR from 76/90 viremic samples, leading to a sequence in 64 of them. Genotyping by phylogenetic analysis with standard reference sequences showed HEV-1 in 1/64 cases, HEV-3 in 63/64. Subtyping of HEV-3 sequences showed 3e (39/63, 62%), 3f (n = 15/63, 24%) and 3c (n = 8/63, 13%) subtypes; in one case the sequence subtype was uncertain and classified as 3hi. In the phylogenetic tree, most 3e sequences grouped in two well distinct clusters (A and B), each one with very low intragroup genetic distances. In contrast, 3f and 3c were interspersed with reference sequences and showed lower tendency to cluster and/or higher intragroup distances. Geographically, while 3f and 3c were scattered throughout the country, 3e was restricted to the South-West area, with most cases in two towns about 40 kilometres apart from each other. Most acute hepatitis E cases in Bulgaria are caused by HEV-3, subtypes 3e, 3f and 3c. Circulation of 3e appears quite different from 3f and 3c, with 3e restricted to the South-West area while 3f and 3c diffused over the country. The factors underlying the observed molecular and geographical differences remain to be investigated.

Hepatitis A virus (HAV) infection is endemic in Eastern European and Balkan region countries. In 2012, Bulgaria showed the highest rate (67.13 cases per 100,000) in Europe. Nevertheless, HAV genotypes and strains circulating in this country have never been described. The present study reports the molecular characterization of HAV from 105 patients from Bulgaria. Anti-HAV IgM positive serum samples collected in 2012–2014 from different towns and villages in Bulgaria were analysed by nested RT-PCR, sequencing of the VP1/2A region and phylogenetic analysis; the results were analysed together with patient and geographical data. Phylogenetic analysis revealed two main sequence groups corresponding to the IA (78/105, 74%) and IB (27/105, 26%) sub-genotypes. In the IA group, a major and a minor cluster were observed (62 and 16 sequences, respectively). Most sequences from the major cluster (44/62, 71%) belonged to either of two strains, termed "strain 1" and "strain 2", differing only for a single specific nucleotide; the remaining sequences (18/62, 29%) showed few (1 to 4) nucleotide variations respect to strain 1 and 2. Strain 2 is identical to the strain previously responsible for an outbreak in the Czech Republic in 2008 and a large multi-country European outbreak caused by contaminated mixed frozen berries in 2013. Most sequences of the IA minor cluster and the IB group were detected in large/medium centers (LMCs). Overall, sequences from the IA major cluster were more frequent in small centers (SCs), but strain 1 and strain 2 showed an opposite relative frequency in SCs and LMCs (strain 1 more frequent in SCs, strain 2 in LMCs). Genotype IA predominated in Bulgaria in 2012–2014 and phylogenetic analysis identified a major cluster of highly related or identical IA sequences, representing 59% of the analysed cases; these isolates were mostly detected in SCs, in which HAV shows higher endemicity than in LMCs. The distribution of viral sequences suggests the existence of some differences between the transmission routes in SCs and LMCs. Molecular characterization of an increased number of isolates from Bulgaria, regularly collected over time, will be useful to explore specific transmission routes and plan appropriate preventing measures.

The prevalence of hepatitis E virus (HEV) in the Bulgarian population remains underestimated. The aim of the present study was to evaluate age and gender trends in HEV prevalence in the heterogeneous Bulgarian population. Stored serum samples from blood donors and different patient sub-populations—kidney recipients (KR), patients with Guillain–Barre syndrome (GBS), Lyme disease (LD), patients with liver involvement and a clinical diagnosis other than viral hepatitis A and E (non-AE), hemodialysis (HD) and HIV-positive patients (HIV)—were retrospectively investigated for markers of past and recent/ongoing HEV infection. The estimated overall seroprevalence of past infection was 10.6%, ranging from 5.9% to 24.5% for the sub-populations evaluated, while the seroprevalence of recent/ongoing HEV infection was 7.5%, ranging from 2.1% to 20.4%. The analysis of the individual sub-populations showed a different prevalence with respect to sex. In regard to age, the cohort effect was preserved, as a multimodal pattern was observed only for the GBS sub-population. Molecular analysis revealed HEV 3f and 3e. The type of the population is one of the main factors on which the anti-HEV prevalence depends, highlighting the need for the development of guidelines related to the detection and diagnosis of HEV infection with regard to specific patient populations.

It is debatable whether HIV-infected patients are at greater risk for hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection compared with healthy subjects. The reported anti-HEV seroprevalence among different groups in Bulgaria varied from 9.04% to 25.9%, but the information regarding the HIV population is still missing. The aim of the present study was to evaluate hepatitis E seroprevalence among HIV-infected patients in Bulgaria and to analyze demographic and immunological factors associated with HEV infection. Serum samples of 312 HIV-infected patients were analyzed retrospectively. Age, sex, residence and laboratory markers for HEV, HBV, HCV and HIV infection, and lymphocytes subpopulations were collected for all patients. None of the tested samples were positive for HEV RNA. HEV seroprevalence among HIV-infected patients was 10.9%. Males were more affected with the highest prevalence of positivity in the age group > 30 to ≤ 40 years. The documented HIV transmission routes in HIV/HEV co-infected group were heterosexual, homosexual, intravenous drug use (IDU), and vertical with predominace of the heterosexual route (z = 0.2; p = 0.804). There was a statistically significant trend of HIV mixed infection with routes of HIV transmission other than homosexual - heterosexual in HIV/HEV group and injection drug use in HIV/HBV/HCV co-infected group. The route of HIV transmission, in contexts of patients’ behavior, was associated with HEV prevalence among HIV-infected patients.

Viral hepatitis B and C are widely recognized problems in hemodialysis (HD) patients. There have been increasing reports of the importance of the hepatitis E virus (HEV) in recent years, but the worldwide data on the seroprevalence of HEV among them are conflicting. The aim of the present study was to assess the seroprevalence of HEV in HD patients and to analyze the predictors of seropositivity. This study was conducted in 2020 in the central part of southern Bulgaria. A total of 225 patients were enrolled. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the determination of anti-HEV IgM/IgG was used. All patients were tested for the presence of HEV RNA. Anti-HEV IgM alone and anti-HEV IgG alone were found in 6 (2.7%) and 14 (6.2%) patients, respectively, and in 4 (1.8%) patients, they were found simultaneously. All patients were HEV RNA-negative. The overall HEV seroprevalence was 10.7% (24/225). The binominal logistic regression analysis of available predictors confirmed the role of vascular access and a duration of dialysis treatment over 5 years as predictors significantly associated with increased risk for HEV, and the consumption of bottled water with lower levels of HEV IgG seroprevalence among hemodialysis patients. The accumulated data are the basis for comparative analysis in subsequent trials in the same dialysis centers and for enhancing the range of screening markers used in this particular patient group.