https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4228-3822
![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
Background
The long-term prognosis following herpes simplex virus (HSV) central nervous system (CNS) infection is still debated.
Patients and Methods
We examined outcomes in all Danish residents who, during 2000–2016, tested PCR positive for HSV-1 (n=208) or HSV-2 (n=283) in the cerebrospinal fluid, compared to comparison cohorts from the general population (n=2080 and n=2830).
Results
One-year mortality was increased among HSV-1 patients (difference 19.3%; 95% CI: 13.6% to 25.0%) and HSV-2 patients (difference 5.3%; 95% CI: 2.5% to 8.1%), but thereafter mortality was not increased. After exclusion of persons diagnosed with cancer prior to study inclusion, one-year mortality difference for HSV-2 patients was 1.7% (−0.1% to 3.5%). After five years, HSV-1 patients had lower employment (difference −19.8%; 95% CI: −34.7% to −4.8%) and higher disability pension rates (difference 22.2%; 95% CI: 8.4% to 36.0%) than the comparison cohort, but similar number of inpatient days, outpatient visits, and sick leave. HSV-2 patients had employment and disability pension rates comparable to the comparison cohort, but more inpatient days (difference 1.5/year; 95% CI: −0.2 to 3.2), outpatient visits (difference 1.3/year; 95% CI: 0.3 to 3.2), and sick leave days (difference 9.1/year; 95% CI: 7.9 to 10.4).
Conclusion
HSV-1 and HSV-2 CNS infections differ substantially with respect to prognosis. HSV-1 CNS infection is followed by increased short-term mortality and long-term risk of disability. HSV-2 CNS infection has no substantial impact on mortality or working capability but is associated with increased morbidity.
Data Sharing Statement
Data are stored in Statistics Denmark and according to Danish data protection cannot be shared.
Disclosure
RBD reports personal fees from Roche Diagnostics, outside the submitted work. A-ML reports personal fees from GSK, non-financial support from Gilead, outside the submitted work. HTS was supported by the PROCRIN program and also reports that The Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, receives funding for other studies from companies in the form of research grants to (and administered by) Aarhus University. None of these studies have any relation to the present study. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.