4.4 Article

HIV NEUROPATHY IN SOUTH AFRICANS: FREQUENCY, CHARACTERISTICS, AND RISK FACTORS

期刊

MUSCLE & NERVE
卷 41, 期 5, 页码 599-606

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mus.21535

关键词

HIV; distal sensory polyneuropathy; Africa; AIDS; nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors; tuberculosis; antiretroviral toxic neuropathy

资金

  1. UCT Neurology
  2. World Diabetes Foundation
  3. South African Department of Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose was to estimate the frequency, characteristics, and risk factors of HIV-associated distal sensory polyneuropathy (DSP) among South Africans who attend an urban community-based clinic. In a cross-sectional study, neuropathy status was determined in 598 HIV-infected adults using validated tools (Brief Peripheral Neuropathy Screen and a modified version of the Total Neuropathy Score) to categorize subjects as DSP versus no DSP. Symptomatic DSP (SDSP) required the presence of at least two neuropathic signs together with symptoms. Clinical, anthropometric, and laboratory evaluations were prospectively performed. CD4 counts, antiretroviral therapy (ART), and questionnaires regarding previous tuberculosis (TB) and alcohol exposure were collected retrospectively. Approximately half (49%) of the study population were diagnosed with DSP, and 30% of the study population were diagnosed with SDSP. In multi-variate analyses the odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval) of DSP were independently associated with ART use (OR 1.7, 1.0-2.9), age (per 10 year increment) (OR 1.7, 1.4-2.2), and prior TB (OR 2.0, 1.3-3.0). Pain or paresthesias were reported as moderately severe by 70% of those with SDSP. Stavudine use was significantly associated with DSP. DSP is a clinically significant problem in urban HIV-infected Africans. Our findings raise the possibility that the incidence of DSP may be reduced with avoidance of stavudine-containing regimens in older subjects, especially with a history of prior TB infection. Muscle Nerve 41: 599-606, 2010

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据