Search

Objectives: We aimed to assess the extent of integration of non‐communicable disease (NCD) assessment and management in HIV clinics across Europe. Methods: A structured electronic questionnaire with 41 multiple‐choice and rating‐scale questions assessing NCD assessment and management was sent to 88 HIV clinics across the WHO European Region during March–May 2023. One response per clinic was collected. Results: In all, 51 clinics from 34 countries with >100 000 people with HIV under regular follow‐up responded. Thirty‐seven clinics (72.6%) reported shared NCD care responsibility with the general practitioner. Systematic assessment for NCDs and integration of NCD management were common overall [median agreement 80%, interquartile range (IQR): 55–95%; and 70%, IQR: 50–88%, respectively] but were lowest in central eastern and eastern Europe. Chronic kidney disease (median agreement 96%, IQR: 85–100%) and metabolic disorders (90%, IQR: 75–100%) were regularly assessed, while mental health (72%, IQR: 63–85%) and pulmonary diseases (52%, IQR: 40–75%) were less systematically assessed. Some essential diagnostic tests such as glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) for diabetes (n = 38/51, 74.5%), proteinuria for kidney disease (n = 30/51, 58.8%) and spirometry for lung disease (n = 11/51, 21.6%) were only employed by a proportion of clinics. The most frequent barriers for integrating NCD care were the lack of healthcare workers (n = 17/51, 33.3%) and lack of time during outpatient visits (n = 12/51, 23.5%). Conclusion: Most HIV clinics in Europe systematically assess and manage NCDs. People with HIV appear to be screened more frequently than the general population at the same age. There are, however, larger gaps among eastern European clinics in general and for clinics in all regions related to mental health, pulmonary diseases and the employment of some essential diagnostic tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In the last decade, substantial differences in the epidemiology of, antiretroviral therapy (ART) for, cascade of care in and support to people with HIV in vulnerable populations have been observed between countries in Western Europe, Central Europe (CE) and Eastern Europe (EE). The aim of this study was to use a survey to explore whether ART availability and therapies have evolved in CE and EE according to European guidelines. Methods: The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe (ECEE) Network Group conducted two identical multicentre cross‐sectional online surveys in 2019 and 2021 concerning the availability and use of antiretroviral drugs (boosted protease inhibitors [bPIs], integrase inhibitors [INSTIs] and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs]), the introduction of a rapid ART start strategy and the use of two‐drug regimens (2DRs) for starting or switching ART. We also investigated barriers to the implementation of these strategies in each region. Results: In total, 18 centres participated in the study: four from CE, six from EE and eight from Southeastern Europe (SEE). Between those 2 years, older PIs were less frequently used and darunavir‐based regimens were the main PIs (83%); bictegravir‐based and tenofovir alafenamide‐based regimens were introduced in CE and SEE but not in EE. The COVID‐19 pandemic did not significantly interrupt delivery of ART in most centres. Two‐thirds of centres adopted a rapid ART start strategy, mainly in pregnant women and to improve linkage of care in vulnerable populations. The main obstacle to rapid ART start was that national guidelines in several countries from all three regions did not support such as strategy or required laboratory tests first; an INSTI/NRTI combination was the most commonly prescribed regimen (75%) and was exclusively prescribed in SEE. 2DRs are increasingly used for starting or switching ART (58%), and an INSTI/NRTI was the preferred regimen (75%) in all regions and exclusively prescribed in SEE, whereas the use of bPIs declined. Metabolic disorders and adverse drug reactions were the main reasons for starting a 2DR; in the second survey, HIV RNA <500 000 c/ml and high cluster of differentiation (CD)‐4 count emerged as additional important reasons. Conclusions: In just 2 years and in spite of the emergence of the COVID‐19 pandemic, significant achievements concerning ART availability and strategies have occurred in CE, EE and SEE that facilitate the harmonization of those strategies with the European AIDS Clinical Society guidelines. Few exceptions exist, especially in EE. Continuous effort is needed to overcome various obstacles (administrative, financial, national guideline restrictions) in some countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: People living with HIV (PLWH) are at higher risk of poorer COVID‐19 outcomes. Vaccination is a safe and effective method of prevention against many infectious diseases, including COVID‐19. Here we investigate the strategies for national COVID‐19 vaccination programmes across central and eastern Europe and the inclusion of PLWH in vaccination programmes. Methods: The Euroguidelines in Central and Eastern Europe Network Group consists of experts in the field of infectious diseases from 24 countries in the region. Between 1 November 2020 and 19 March 2021 the group proceeded an on‐line survey consisting of 20 questions. Results: Twenty‐two countries (out of 24 invited) participated in the survey and 20/22 countries in the period between December 2020 and March 2021 had already started their COVID‐19 vaccination programme. In total, seven different vaccines were used by participating countries. In 17/21 countries (81%), vaccinated persons were centralized within the national registry. In 8/21 countries (38%) PLWH were prioritized for vaccination (the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Montenegro, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia) and the Czech Republic, Greece and Serbia had put in place national guidelines for vaccination of PLWH. In 14/20 countries (70%) vaccination was only provided by designated centres. Eighteen respondents (18/21; 85.7%) reported that they planned to follow up HIV patients vaccinated against COVID‐19, mainly by measuring antibody levels and checking COVID‐19 incidence (11/21; 52.3%). Conclusions: This survey‐based study suggests that there are significant differences in terms of prioritizing PLWH, the types of vaccines used, vaccination coverage, and the development and implementation of a vaccination programmes within the region. Regardless of heterogenicity and existing barriers within the region, systematic vaccination in PLWH should have the highest priority, especially in those with severe immunodeficiency, risk factors, and in the elderly, aiming for prompt and high vaccination coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Listeria monocytogenes is a small, aerobic or facultative anaerobic, non-sporulating gram positive bacillus that can be isolated from soil, vegetation or animal reservoirs. There are six species of Listeria, and only L. monocytogenes is pathogenic for humans. Human disease occurs mainly in immunocompromised people, neonates and in pregnancy, while the cases in immunocompetent people are rare. CNS manifestations of the disease can be in form of meningitis, encephalitis, and also cerebritis and abscess since L. monocytogenes shows tropism for brain and brain stem as well for the meninges. In this case we presented 55 year old male patient with etiologically confirmed listerial meningoencephalitis, transferred from regional hospital tothe Clinic for Infectious Diseases with diagnosis of acute meningoencephalitis. Disease started 4 days before the admission. Prior to this the patient was completely healthy. In his history he denied any preexisting disease. At admittance he was febrile, with altered consciousness, disoriented, showing ocular deviation, dystaxia, and with completely positive meningeal signs. Neurologist diagnosis was rhombencephalitis. CSF analysis showed mildly opalescent liquor with pleocytosis 546/mm3 and polymorphonuclear cell predominance >70%. CSF culture showed positive isolate of L. monocytogenes. Initial therapy was: Penicillin G and Chloramphenicol, together with all other supportive and symptomatic therapy. After initial therapy and based on antibiogram, ampicillin was administered for4 weeks, followed by imipenemum for 10 days. Control CSF analysis showed pleocytosis and increased protein level and the patient was discharged as recovered with diagnosis of acute meningoencephalitis