Clinical characteristics and outcomes of people living with HIV and ocular syphilis during the COVID-19 health emergency

Abstract

Background

The global shift in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic led to challenges in the care of people living with HIV.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study that aimed to delineate sociodemographic, clinical characteristics and outcomes, of people living with HIV diagnosed with ocular syphilis.

Results

Fifty-three people living with HIV were identified with ocular syphilis. Thirty-eight (71.6%) presented ocular symptoms. Twenty-three (43.3%) underwent lumbar puncture, 5 (9.4%) were positive for neurosyphilis. Forty-seven (88.6%) received treatment, 32 (68%) received standard treatment with aqueous crystalline penicillin G, and 15 (31.9%) were treated with alternative regimens due to the impossibility of hospitalization. Six (11.3%) individuals were lost to follow-up and/or did not receive treatment. Eighteen (56.2%) out of 32 individuals in the aqueous crystalline penicillin G group experienced serological response, 5 (15.6%) experienced treatment failure, and 9 (28.1%) were lost to follow-up. In the alternative therapy group, 12 out of 15 individuals (80%) experienced serological response. One (6.7%) experienced treatment failure, and 2 (13.3%) were lost to follow-up.

Conclusions

During the COVID-19 health emergency in Mexico, alternative treatments for ocular syphilis demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes amid challenges in accessing hospitalization.

Keywords:

• Ocular syphilis
• alternative regimen
• PLHIV
• treatment outcomes
• limited resources

Acknowledgements

We thank Andrea Gonzalez Rodríguez (Clínicas Especializadas Condesa, Mexico City) for assistance in data sharing agreement administration.

Authors contributions

Conceptualization and design of the study: EPB, JCRA, and PRB. Data acquisition: EPB, JCRA, PRB, KGVM, GEGM, BGF, AGR, and RACF. JCRA, EPB, and PRB prepared the article. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

There was no funding source for this study.