We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Zika Virus Infection and Differential Diagnosis in a Cohort of HIV-Infected Patients.
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes : JAIDS 2018 October 2
BACKGROUND: Zika virus (ZIKV) emergence in South America revealed the lack of knowledge regarding clinical manifestations in HIV-infected individuals.
OBJECTIVES: We described the clinical characteristics, laboratory manifestations, differential diagnosis, and outcome of ZIKV infection in a large, single-center cohort of HIV-infected patients.
METHODS: HIV-infected patients aged 18 years and older with clinical suspected arboviral disease from an ongoing cohort were followed from February 2015 through December 2015. Acute serum samples were tested for ZIKV, dengue virus (DENV), and chikungunya virus by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, anti-DENV immunoglobulin (Ig)M/IgG, and syphilis assays; convalescent samples were tested for anti-DENV IgM/IgG; and urine samples were tested for ZIKV by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. ZIKV disease was defined according to the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) guidelines.
RESULTS: Of 101 patients, ZIKV was confirmed in 43 cases and suspected in 34, and another diagnosis was assumed for 24 patients (dengue, secondary/latent syphilis, respiratory infections, human parvovirus B19, adverse drug reaction, musculoskeletal disorders, and acute gastroenteritis). ZIKV-confirmed and ZIKV-suspected patients reported similar signs and symptoms. Pruritic rash was the most common symptom, followed by myalgia, nonpurulent conjunctivitis, arthralgia, prostration, and headache. In the short-term follow-up [median 67.5 days (interquartile range: 32-104.5)], CD4 cell count (Z = -0.831, P = 0.406) and HIV viral load (Z = -0.447, P = 0.655) did not change significantly after ZIKV infection. There were no hospitalizations, complications, or deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: Among HIV-infected patients with suspected arboviral disease, 42.6% were ZIKV-infected. CD4 cell counts and HIV viral load were not different after ZIKV infection. Differential diagnosis with other diseases and adverse drug reaction should be evaluated.
OBJECTIVES: We described the clinical characteristics, laboratory manifestations, differential diagnosis, and outcome of ZIKV infection in a large, single-center cohort of HIV-infected patients.
METHODS: HIV-infected patients aged 18 years and older with clinical suspected arboviral disease from an ongoing cohort were followed from February 2015 through December 2015. Acute serum samples were tested for ZIKV, dengue virus (DENV), and chikungunya virus by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, anti-DENV immunoglobulin (Ig)M/IgG, and syphilis assays; convalescent samples were tested for anti-DENV IgM/IgG; and urine samples were tested for ZIKV by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. ZIKV disease was defined according to the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) guidelines.
RESULTS: Of 101 patients, ZIKV was confirmed in 43 cases and suspected in 34, and another diagnosis was assumed for 24 patients (dengue, secondary/latent syphilis, respiratory infections, human parvovirus B19, adverse drug reaction, musculoskeletal disorders, and acute gastroenteritis). ZIKV-confirmed and ZIKV-suspected patients reported similar signs and symptoms. Pruritic rash was the most common symptom, followed by myalgia, nonpurulent conjunctivitis, arthralgia, prostration, and headache. In the short-term follow-up [median 67.5 days (interquartile range: 32-104.5)], CD4 cell count (Z = -0.831, P = 0.406) and HIV viral load (Z = -0.447, P = 0.655) did not change significantly after ZIKV infection. There were no hospitalizations, complications, or deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: Among HIV-infected patients with suspected arboviral disease, 42.6% were ZIKV-infected. CD4 cell counts and HIV viral load were not different after ZIKV infection. Differential diagnosis with other diseases and adverse drug reaction should be evaluated.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app