4.4 Article

Association between genital schistosomiasis and HIV in rural Zimbabwean women

期刊

AIDS
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 593-600

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.aids.0000210614.45212.0a

关键词

Schistosoma haematobium; genital schistosomiasis; HIV; women; sexually transmitted diseases; sandy patch; Africa

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine the association between female genital Schistosoma haematobium infection and HIV. Design and methods: A cross-sectional study with a 1-year follow-up. Gynecological and laboratory investigations were performed for S. haematobium and HIV. Sexually transmitted infections, demographic and urogenital history were analysed as confounders. The participants were 527 sexually active, non-pregnant, non-menopausal women between the ages of 20 and 49 years. The setting was a rural Zimbabwean community where S. haematobium related lesions were found in 46% of the women, HIV in 29% and herpes simplex type-2 (HSV-2) in 65%. Results: In permanent residents (>3 years residency), HIV was found in 41% (29/70) of women with laboratory proven genital schistosomiasis as opposed to 26% HIV positive (96/375) in the schistosomal ova negative group [odds ratio (OR), 2.1; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-3.5; P = 0.008. In multivariate analysis S. haematobium infection of the genital mucosa was significantly associated with HIV seropositivity (adjusted OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.11-7.5; P = 0.030). All seven women who became HIV positive during the study period (seroincidence 3.1%) had signs of S. haematobium at baseline. In accordance with other studies HIV was significantly associated with HSV-2 (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.7-5.3; P < 0.001), syphilis and human papillomavirus. The highest HIV prevalence (45%) was found in the 25-29 years age group. Conclusion: Women with genital schistosomiasis had an almost three-fold risk of having HIV in this rural Zimbabwean community. Prospective studies are needed to confirm the association. (C) 2006 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

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