4.7 Article

High Proportions of Patients With Advanced HIV Are Antiretroviral Therapy Experienced: Hospitalization Outcomes From 2 Sub-Saharan African Sites

期刊

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 66, 期 -, 页码 S126-S131

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciy103

关键词

Kenya; Democratic Republic of Congo; treatment failure

资金

  1. MSF
  2. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains an important cause of hospitalization and death in low- and middle- income countries. Yet morbidity and in-hospital mortality patterns remain poorly characterized, with prior antiretroviral therapy (ART) exposure and treatment failure status largely unknown. Methods. We studied HIV-infected inpatients aged >= 13 years from cohorts in Kenya and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), assessing clinical and demographic characteristics and hospitalization outcomes. Kenyan inpatients were prospectively enrolled during hospitalization; identical retrospective data were extracted for Congolese patients meeting the study criteria using routine medical information. Results. Among 338 HIV-infected patients in Kenya and 411 in DRC, 83.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.4%-87.3%) and 97.3% (95% CI, 95.2%-98.5%), were admitted with advanced disease (defined as CD4 < 200 cells/mu L or World Health Organization stage 3/4 illness). Among inpatients with advanced HIV, 35.4% and 21.7% were ART-naive at admission. Patients under care had a median time of 44.1 (interquartile range [IQR], 18.4-90.5) months and 55.9 (IQR, 28.1-99.6) months on treatment; 17.2% (95% CI, 13.5%-21.6%) and 29.6% (95% CI, 25.4%-34.3%) died, 25.9% (95% CI, 16.0%-39.0%) and 22.5% (95% CI, 15.8%-31.0%) of these within 48 hours. Conclusions. Across 2 diverse clinical contexts in sub-Saharan Africa, advanced HIV inpatients were frequently admitted with low CD4 counts, often failing first-line ART. Earlier identification of treatment failure and rapid switching to second-line ART are needed.

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

4.7
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