Cohort Study on the Influence of Opportunistic Infectious Pathogens on the Distribution of Peripheral Blood T Lymphocyte Subsets in Newly Acquired AIDS Patients During Antiretroviral Therapy
-
摘要:
目的 探讨机会性感染病原体对新发艾滋病患者高效抗逆转录病毒治疗过程中外周血T淋巴细胞亚群分布的影响。 方法 收集2019年1月1日至2020年6月30日昆明市第三人民医院感染一科收治的初次确诊且未经抗病毒治疗的艾滋病患者220例,经临床诊断,220例中艾滋病合并结核分枝杆菌33例,艾滋病合并丙型肝炎病毒30例,艾滋病合并马尔尼菲篮状菌31例,其余病例中艾滋病合并1种病原体45例,艾滋病合并2种病原体30例,艾滋病合并3种及以上病原体51例,治疗方案为富马酸替诺福韦二吡呋酯片 + 拉米夫定 + 依非韦伦(TDF + 3TC + EFV),分别于治疗前、治疗3、6、12个月采集患者抗凝血样本,采用流式细胞术检测患者外周血T淋巴细胞亚群,对比分析各组患者抗病毒治疗过程中外周血T淋巴细胞亚群分布情况。 结果 艾滋病合并结核分枝杆菌(AIDS/TB)、艾滋病合并丙型肝炎病毒(AIDS/HCV)、艾滋病合并马尔尼菲篮状菌(AIDS/TM)3组患者在治疗3个月后CD3+、CD8+和CD4+T淋巴细胞计数都明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),除了AIDS/TM组治疗6个月后CD4+T淋巴细胞计数再次明显升高,其余2组3项指标随后治疗过程中无明显变化,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);治疗1a后3组患者的CD3+和CD8+T淋巴细胞计数无明显差异,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);而AIDS/HCV组CD4+T淋巴细胞计数要高于其它2个组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。艾滋病合并1种病原体(AIDS/1)组抗病毒治疗3个月后CD3+和CD8+T淋巴细胞计数明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),整个治疗过程中CD4+T淋巴细胞计数无明显变化,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);艾滋病合并2种病原体(AIDS/2)组治疗6个月后CD3+及治疗3个月后CD8+T淋巴细胞计数明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);艾滋病合并3种及以上病原体(AIDS/≥3)组治疗6个月后,CD3+和CD8+T淋巴细胞计数才明显升高;AIDS/2和AIDS/≥3组在治疗3、6个月后CD4+T淋巴细胞计数明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。治疗1年后3组患者的CD3+和CD8+T淋巴细胞计数无明显差异,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);而AIDS/1组CD4+T淋巴细胞计数要高于其它2个组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。6组患者1a的治疗过程中CD4+/CD8+比值都 < 1。 结论 规范的高效抗逆转录病毒治疗后,艾滋病患者外周血CD3+和CD8+T淋巴细胞计数都能恢复到同等水平与机会性感染病原体的种类和数量无关,而艾滋病患者治疗前T淋巴细胞亚群分布水平的高低和机会性感染病原体的种类及数量会影响治疗过程中CD4+T淋巴细胞计数的恢复速度和水平。高效抗逆转录病毒治疗前3个月是评估治疗效果好坏的关键期,而CD4/CD8不是一个理想的治疗效果评估指标。 -
关键词:
- 艾滋病 /
- 机会性感染 /
- T淋巴细胞亚群 /
- 高效抗逆转录病毒治疗
Abstract:Objective To investigate the influence of opportunistic infectious pathogens on the distribution of peripheral blood T lymphocyte subsets in newly acquired AIDS patients during efficient antiretroviral therapy. Methods A total of 220 AIDS patients who were first diagnosed and not performed with antiviral treatment in Infectious Disease Department I of Kunming Third People's Hospital from January 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020 were collected. According to clinical diagnosis, out of 220 patients, 33 patients had AIDS combined with mycobacterium tuberculosis, 30 patients had AIDS combined with hepatitis C virus, 31 patients had AIDS with Talaromyces marneffei, 45 patients had AIDS combined with 1 pathogens, 30 patients had AIDS with 2 pathogens, and 51 patients had AIDS with 3 or more pathogens. The treatment regimen was Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate tablets + lamivudine + EFV (TDF + 3TC + EFV). Anticoagulant samples were collected before treatment, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment. The peripheral blood T lymphocyte subsets were detected by flow cytometry. The distribution of peripheral blood T lymphocyte subsets in each group during antiviral treatment was compared and analyzed. Results The counts of CD3+, CD8+ and CD4+T lymphocyte in 3 groups of patients including the patients with AIDS combined with mycobacterium tuberculosis (AIDS/TB), the patients with AIDS combined with hepatitis c virus (AIDS/HCV) and the patients with AIDS combined with Talaromyces marneffei (AIDS/TM) were significantly increased after 3 months treatment, and the differences were of statistical significance (P < 0.05). As for AIDS/TM group, the CD4+T lymphocyte count increased significantly after 6 months of treatment; As for the other two groups, there was no obvious change of 3 indexes in the subsequent treatment, and the difference was statistically significant. (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the count of CD3+ and CD8 + T lymphocytes in the three groups after 1 year of treatment, and the difference was of no statistical significance (P > 0.05); The CD4 + T lymphocyte count in AIDS/HCV group was higher than that of the other two groups, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The CD3+ and CD8+T lymphocyte counts increased significantly after 3 months of antiviral treatment in the group of AIDS with 1 pathogen (AIDS/1), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no significant change in CD4+T lymphocyte count during the whole treatment period, and the difference was no statistically significant (P > 0.05). The CD8+T lymphocyte counts after treatment for 6 months and the CD3+ lymphocyte counts after treatment for 3 months in the group of AIDS with 2 pathogens increased significantly, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The CD3+ and CD8+T lymphocyte counts increased significantly after 6 months of treatment in the group of AIDS with 3 or more pathogens (AIDS/≥3); The CD4+T lymphocyte count of AIDS/2 and AIDS/≥3 groups increased significantly after 3 and 6 months of treatment, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). After one year of treatment, there was no significant difference in CD3+ and CD8+T lymphocyte counts among the three groups, and the difference was no statistically significant (P > 0.05); The CD4+T lymphocyte count of AIDS/1 group was higher than that of the other two groups, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The ratio of CD4+/CD8+ in 6 groups was less than 1. Conclusions After the standardized efficient antiretroviral therapy, the counts of CD3+ and CD8+T lymphocytes in the peripheral blood of AIDS patients can be restored to the same level, regardless of the type and quantity of opportunistic pathogens. The distribution level of T lymphocyte subsets in the AIDS patients before and after treatment and the type and quantity of opportunistic pathogens will affect the recovery rate and level of CD4+T lymphocyte count during treatment. Three months before the efficient antiretroviral treatment is the key period to evaluate the therapeutic effect, while CD4/CD8 is not an ideal evaluation index. -
牙列缺失是口腔常见病和多发病,多见于老年人,而牙列缺失的修复也是口腔临床工作的难点[1-2]。根据第四次全国口腔健康流行病学调查报告显示,55~64岁年龄组和65~74岁年龄组牙列缺失患病率分别为1.1%和4.5%[3]。我国人口基数庞大,随着人口老龄化速度的加快,牙列缺失患者将会日渐增多。尽管种植修复可以提高义齿的固位力和稳定性[4-5],但由于老年患者全身健康状况、剩余牙槽嵴解剖条件、种植手术耐受情况、经济条件及种植修复治疗疗程等多方面的因素限制,粘膜支持式的全口义齿仍然是目前牙列缺失患者选择的主要修复方式[6-8]。
传统全口义齿(conventional complete denture,CCD)修复的成功与否取决于许多因素,如解剖特征、口腔粘膜状况、患者心理状况、医师和技师的经验、咬合设计等[9-10]。生物功能性义齿修复系统(biofunctional prosthetic system,BPS)拥有一整套精细的操作系统和配套材料,包括取模、咬合记录、排牙、聚合、完成和交付,每一步都按照明确的程序执行,使全口义齿的制作更加标准化和系统化[11-12]。该系统能有效地保证制作全口义齿的精密性和科学性,然而,目前BPS配套材料和设备成本较高,在国内临床工作中尚难广泛应用。因此,笔者在BPS理念的基础上探索一种相对简便容易的简化生物功能性义齿(simplified biofunctional prosthetic denture,SBPD)修复方法制作全口义齿,有利于降低全口义齿修复的成本,惠及更多牙列缺失患者。
1. 对象与方法
1.1 实验对象
病例选择自2018年10月至2020年9月来深圳大学总医院口腔科就诊的牙列缺失患者26例,所有患者进行随机编号分组,分别用CCD方法[男8例,女5例,平均年龄(66.5±8.7)岁]和SBPD方法[男7例,女6例,平均年龄(69.4±8.4)岁]制作全口义齿。临床治疗前均详细告知患者相关治疗程序及可能出现的不适,并与患者签署知情同意书。纳入标准:(1)牙槽嵴呈中、重度吸收者,扪诊无明显疼痛;(2)上下颌骨关系正常;(3)张口度正常;(4)口腔黏膜无严重破溃及瘢痕,唾液分泌量无明显异常,无口干史;(5)具备完全自主的行为能力和表达能力,能与医生配合。排除标准:(1)牙槽嵴或粘膜有明显压痛;(2)上下颌骨关系异常;(3)张口度异常;(4)有严重口腔粘膜病变;(5)不具备自主行为能力和表达能力;(6)具有颞下颌关节紊乱病者。
1.2 主要材料和设备
硅橡胶印模材料(登士柏公司,德国),藻酸盐印模材料、超硬石膏(贺利氏公司,德国),个别托盘光固化树脂、树脂牙(上海沪鸽公司,中国),托盘粘接剂(3M公司,美国),咬合记录硅橡胶(金玛克公司,意大利),边缘整塑硅橡胶、正中托盘、哥特式弓描记仪(义获嘉维瓦登特公司,列士敦士登),平均值牙合架(阿曼吉尔巴赫公司,德国),红白打样膏(上海荣祥齿科材料有限公司,中国)。
1.3 义齿制作方法
CCD法制作全口义齿:(1)利用传统无牙颌托盘、红白打样膏及藻酸盐制取初印模并灌制初模型,取印模前将口内唾液用纱布尽量拭干;(2)制作个别托盘、开口印模法制取终印模,灌制终模型;(3)常规制作蜡堤,用息止颌位的方法明确垂直距离,对水平颌位关系则用吞咽方法确定;(4)送技工室完成上牙合架,并对人工牙进行排列;(5)试排牙,试戴合适后完成[13-14]。
SBPD方法制作全口义齿:(1)应用传统无牙颌托盘及硅橡胶制取上下颌全口初印模,灌制初模型,取印模前将口内唾液用纱布尽量拭干;(2)制取上颌印模时注意应先用高流动型的硅橡胶注射到翼上颌切迹、上颌结节、颊粘膜皱襞和唇系带,取下颌印模时先将高流动型硅橡胶注射在下颌舌骨后窝区、口底,再将盛有油泥型硅橡胶的托盘在口内就位并行肌功能整塑;(3)应用正中托盘及硅橡胶初步确定垂直距离,将盛有硅橡胶的正中托盘放入患者口中,注意将托盘压向下牙槽嵴嘱患者缓缓闭合引导上颌咬到印模材料里并到适当的垂直距离;(4)制作暂基托及蜡堤;涂布托盘粘固剂、口内边缘整塑,高流动型硅橡胶制取上下颌闭口式终印模。注意制取上颌终印模时嘱患者发唔、咦音并做吸吮的动作和下颌左右摆动的动作,制取下颌印模时嘱患者发唔、咦音,舌体左右摆动并做吞咽动作,记录粘膜和肌肉运动的边界;(5)应用哥特式弓法确定水平颌位关系,咬合记录,描计针位于下颌,描计板位于上颌,嘱患者做后牙小幅度开闭口运动,在描计板上形成记录起点,然后嘱患者分别做前伸运动然后回到起点,左侧方运动然后回到起点,右侧方运动然后回到起点,将透明板的一个小孔与起点重合,如起点不清晰则将小孔固定于箭头后方0.5 mm处,确定患者重复做咬合动作均能实现描计针进入塑料板小孔内则在这一位置注入咬合记录硅橡胶材料;(6)采用围模灌注法灌制石膏终模型并上平均值合架,舌侧集中牙合排牙;(7)试戴蜡牙,检查人工牙的排列及咬合关系,如无问题则完成。部分过程及术前术后面像,见图1。
图 1 简化生物功能性义齿制作部分过程及术前术后面像A、B:牙列缺失患者口内牙合面像;C、D:硅橡胶制取上下颌初印模;E、F:个别托盘及硅橡胶制取上下颌闭口式终印模;G:正中托盘制取初步正中关系;H:口内试戴牙合托;I:放置哥特式弓描计针和描计板;J:哥特式弓记录下颌边缘运动轨迹,确定水平颌位关系;K:咬合记录;L:完成全口义齿制作;M:术前正面微笑像;N:术前侧面微笑像;O:术后正面微笑像;P:术后侧面微笑像。Figure 1. Partial process of simplified biofunctional prosthetic denture and pre-and post-treatment facial image1.4 患者满意度调查
戴牙后即刻、戴牙后1个月及戴牙后3个月分别填写义齿满意度视觉模拟评分量表(visual analogue scale,VAS)进行满意度调查[15],内容包括牙齿美观度、口腔语言功能、咀嚼功能、舒适性及固位功能,最优为100分,最差为0分。
1.5 统计学处理
用SPSS 21.0 软件对结果进行两个独立样本的t检验,数据以均数±标准差(
$ \bar{x}\pm s $ )形式表示。比较两种方式制作的全口义齿满意度,P < 0.05 表示差异具有统计学意义。2. 结果
纳入的26位患者满意度调查结果显示,两组病例术后即刻、术后一个月和术后三个月在义齿固位、咀嚼功能和舒适性上,SBPD方法制作的全口义齿组满意度均显著高于CCD方法制作的全口义齿组(P < 0.05),见表1~3。
表 1 两组病例术后即刻主观满意度评分表($\bar x \pm s$ )Table 1. Immediate subjective satisfaction score of two groups ($\bar x \pm s$ )组别 例数(n) 美观度 语音功能 咀嚼功能 舒适性 固位功能 CCD组 13 91.2 ± 6.3 81.0 ± 12.3 70.2 ± 9.8 68.1 ± 9.0 71.5 ± 9.9 SBPD组 13 90.6 ± 6.5 84.1 ± 7.8 78.3 ± 5.5 75.2 ± 7.9 78.9 ± 6.8 t 0.307 0.761 2.592 2.280 2.196 P 0.734 0.733 0.034* 0.032* 0.038* 两组比较,*P < 0.05。 表 2 两组病例术后一个月主观满意度评分表($\bar x \pm s$ )Table 2. Subjective satisfaction score of two groups after 1 month ($ \bar x \pm s $ )组别 例数(n) 美观度 语音功能 咀嚼功能 舒适性 固位功能 CCD组 13 92.0 ± 5.4 89.7 ± 5.8 81.2 ± 5.8 82.4 ± 6.6 78.8 ± 7.1 SBPD组 13 91.2 ± 5.7 88.9 ± 5.7 85.5 ± 5.5 87.9 ± 4.2 85.9 ± 6.0 t 0.352 0.340 2.193 2.500 2.788 P 0.712 0.711 0.038* 0.020* 0.010* 两组比较,*P < 0.05。 表 3 两组病例术后三个月主观满意度评分表($\bar x \pm s$ )Table 3. Subjective satisfaction score of two groups after 3 month ($\bar x \pm s$ )组别 例数(n) 美观度 语音功能 咀嚼功能 舒适性 固位功能 CCD组 13 92.8 ± 5.8 91.8 ± 6.1 82.2 ± 4.6 85.0 ± 5.8 83.5 ± 6.2 SBPD组 13 92.0 ± 6.2 91.5 ± 7.2 87.9 ± 5.9 91.4 ± 6.9 89.5 ± 6.3 t 0.329 0.386 2.770 2.549 2.452 P 0.747 0.895 0.011* 0.018* 0.022* 两组比较,*P < 0.05。 两组病例术后即刻、术后一个月和术后三个月在义齿美观度和语音功能上的满意度并没有显著差异(P > 0.05)。
3. 讨论
老年人的口腔健康是老龄化社会需要重点关注的问题,口腔健康直接影响老年人的身体健康和生活质量[16]。如何在现有条件下提高全口义齿修复的效果和患者满意度并且尽量少增加患者经济负担是口腔修复医师和口腔技师需要面临的一项挑战。毫无疑问,按照BPS的步骤和材料制作全口义齿可以提高全口义齿制作的成功率和患者满意度[11, 17]。然而,BPS系统成本较高,全口义齿的患者多为老年人,经济能力有限,并且国内公立医院口腔科和口腔门诊尚未普及BPS的全套设备和材料。因此,笔者采用了SBPD全口义齿修复的方法,该方法在节约成本、简化步骤的同时也获得了良好的临床修复效果和患者满意度,适宜推广。
SBPD方法精准可控,在熟练的医技配合下,可以有效缩短椅旁时间,操作过程应用临床常用设备和材料,与BPS系统比较降低了诊疗费用。BPS系统运用Accu托盘系统、高流动型的注射型Accu-Gel和重体印模材料的双印膜法制取初印模[11-12],而笔者采用临床较易获得的无牙颌托盘、硅橡胶重体和轻体联合法同样能获得清晰的初印模。下颌舌侧翼缘区的后方由于受到舌体的阻挡是全口义齿印模制取的难点[18],笔者在应用硅橡胶制取初印模的过程中发现,如初次未获得该部位解剖结构清晰的印模,尚可通过在该部位增加硅橡胶后再次将托盘复位的方法取出清晰完整的初印模,两次的硅橡胶可以结合为一体,这一优点是藻酸盐类印模材料不具备的。BPS系统采用义获嘉通用转移面弓系统进行面弓转移并上全可调合架排牙,咬合设计为舌侧集中合,应用纳米树脂改性的SRPhonares人工牙,提高了全口义齿制作的精度[11]。然而,已有研究表明应用面弓转移上牙合架的方法制作全口义齿并不能提高患者的满意度,通过口内调牙合可以消除因没有应用面弓转移颌位关系导致的误差[19-21]。笔者临床采用平均值合架及舌侧集中牙合型硬质树脂牙结合口内调牙合的方法能够获得良好的咬合效果和患者的满意度,与上述文献研究结果一致。
本研究对SBPD方法制作的全口义齿与传统方法制作的全口义齿进行满意度调查,从牙齿美观度、口腔语言功能、咀嚼功能、舒适性及固位功能等方面评价患者对义齿的满意度。结果显示应用SBPD方法制作全口义齿的患者在咀嚼功能、舒适性及固位功能方面评分明显高于CCD组。此结果说明SBPD方法制作的全口义齿对患者口腔相关生活质量的改善更明显。出现此结果可能是由于SBPD全口义齿制作过程整合了BPS义齿的理念,使全口义齿制作流程更加系统化和规范化,提高患者佩戴全口义齿的满意度。
综上所述,应用SBPD方法制作全口义齿与CCD方法制作全口义齿修复牙列缺失患者的结果表明,SBPD方法可以提高患者使用全口义齿的满意度,改善无牙颌患者生活质量,值得临床中进一步实践和推广。
-
表 1 AIDS/TB 、AIDS/HCV 、AIDS/TM 三组患者抗病毒治疗过程中T淋巴细胞亚群分布特征[(
$ \bar x \pm s $ ,M(P25,P75)]Table 1. The distribution characteristics of T lymphocyte subsets in peripheral blood of patients in 3groups during antiviral therapy [
$ \bar x \pm s $ ,M(P25,P75)]指标 CD3+
(个/μL)CD3+CD8+
(个/μL)CD3+CD4+
(个/μL)CD3+/
淋巴细胞(%)CD3+CD8+/
淋巴细胞(%)CD3+CD4+/
淋巴细胞(%)CD4+/
CD8+治疗前 AIDS/TB 615.1(309.6,854.5) 471.2 ± 291.3 65.9(35.0,195.1) 65.9 ± 12.9 49.9 ± 15.1 8.3(4.6,16.6) 0.3(0.1,0.5) AIDS/HCV 896.5(498.2,1273.9) 661.6 ± 582.1 158.3(94.1,346.5) 69.1 ± 12.3 47.1 ± 15.0 13.4(9.3,21.3) 0.3(0.1,0.6) AIDS/TM 326.6(114.1,624.8) 242.4(86.1,571.6) 21.85(7.1,56.8) 59.8 ± 16.1 52.4(34.8,61.2) 5.2 ± 3.2 0.1(0.1,0.2) 治疗3个月 AIDS/TB 800.4(472.9,1228.2) 663.7(362.4,1068.1) 259.9(75.4,267.2) 71.8 ± 10.0 49.6 ± 11.8 16.7 ± 10.8 0.4 ± 0.1 AIDS/HCV 1146.2 ± 750.4 855.1 ± 544.8 309.5 ± 234.2 76.8(69.5,79.9) 49.1 ± 17.4 18.5 ± 12.8 0.3(0.2,0.8) AIDS/TM 706.5(592.0,849.3) 597.4(512.4,676.7) 82.2(30.5,142.8) 76.1(71.3,82.4) 56.6 ± 16.2 11.8 ± 7.5 0.2(0.1,0.3) 治疗6个月 AIDS/TB 958.2(752.8,1075.4) 671.1 ± 409.3 209.5(70.9,372.4) 69.9 ± 11.0 48.1 ± 18.1 15.3 ± 10.7 0.2(0.1,0.6) AIDS/HCV 1236.1 ± 499.5 810.9 ± 384.3 340.0 ± 187.8 69.8 ± 10.4 44.7 ± 10.7 19.9 ± 10.3 0.4(0.3,0.7) AIDS/TM 806.2 ± 559.3 611.9 ± 404.2 74.5(15.3,316.6) 65.9 ± 17.0 51.2 ± 13.4 9.4 ± 6.7 0.2(0.1,0.3) 治疗12个月 AIDS/TB 900.7(755.9,1315.8) 579.4(462.1,987.7) 196.1(139.9,372.7) 67.9 ± 12.1 47.4 ± 12.7 15.3 ± 4.9 0.3(0.2,0.6) AIDS/HCV 1157.7 ± 595.3 722.4 ± 358.4 368.7 ± 269.3 71.8(61.7,74.9) 42.9 ± 10.0 21.5 ± 9.9 0.5 ± 0.3 AIDS/TM 905.8.7 ± 259.3 652.9 ± 167.1 189.2 ± 117.4 74.9 ± 8.6 53.3(47.6,63.0) 14.7 ± 6.3 0.3(0.2,0.4) 备注:AIDS/TB 33例;AIDS/HCV 30例;AIDS/TM 31例。 表 2 AIDS/1、AIDS/2、AIDS/≥3三组患者抗病毒治疗过程中T淋巴细胞亚群分布特征[
$ \bar x \pm s $ ,M(P25,P75)]Table 2. the distribution characteristics of T lymphocyte subsets in peripheral blood of patients in 3groups during antiviral therapy[
$ \bar x \pm s $ ,M(P25,P75)]指标 CD3+
(个/μL)CD3+CD8+
(个/μL)CD3+CD4+
(个/μL)CD3+/
淋巴细胞(%)CD3+CD8+/
淋巴细胞(%)CD3+CD4+/
淋巴细胞(%)CD4+/
CD8+治疗前 AIDS/1 1097.1 ± 568.0 701.9 ± 387.5 315.6 ± 256.3 72.9(65.6,78.8) 47.1 ± 14.9 18.9 ± 12.2 0.4(0.2,0.7) AIDS/2 693.7(516.3,916.4) 447.6(210.7,774.1) 42.8(21.9,135.6) 61.9 ± 16.3 50.5 ± 14.5 7.7 ± 5.0 0.1(0.1,0.2) AIDS/≥3 451.4(253.3,672.1) 372.9(211.6,525.6) 35.0(11.6,80.2) 66.5 ± 13.2 55.1 ± 12.1 5.8(3.1,8.6) 0.1(0.1,0.1) 治疗3个月 AIDS/1 1339.8 ± 832.2 892.5 ± 585.4 357.6 ± 303.2 79.1(66.6,80.9) 49.8 ± 16.4 18.6 ± 13.1 0.3(0.2,0.7) AIDS/2 811.1(518.1,1392.9) 596.8(407.6,1080.0) 110.5(76.1,136.7) 69.4 ± 12.6 54.7 ± 13.4 10.5 ± 6.7 0.2(0.1,0.3) AIDS/≥3 596.5(437.9,777.6) 529.3 ± 239.9 91.7(44.7,170.0) 72.5 ± 4.8 56.8(50.0,63.7) 12.9 ± 7.1 0.2(0.1,0.4) 治疗6个月 AIDS/1 1590.6 ± 707.3 1091.4 ± 421.6 377.7 ± 292.6 74.1 ± 9.0 52.3 ± 10.0 15.9 ± 7.0 0.3(0.2,0.4) AIDS/2 1100.0(780.3,1385.0) 789.0(560.3,1221.2) 186.3 ± 85.5 67.0 ± 11.5 50.9 ± 14.1 11.7 ± 6.6 0.3 ± 0.2 AIDS/≥3 1042.7 ± 483.7 772.9 ± 377.5 185.1 ± 112.9 68.8 ± 10.4 51.0 ± 10.7 12.5 ± 7.0 0.2(0.1,0.4) 治疗12个月 AIDS/1 1635.0(1153.9,1868.6) 1115.3(827.6,1338.7) 354.7(244.3,428.5) 75.5(72.2,80.6) 53.7 ± 8.6 16.8 ± 5.3 0.3(0.2,0.5) AIDS/2 1045.2(838.5,1549.2) 765.4(588.2,1247.8) 219.3 ± 101.4 70.6(53.8,75.0) 50.2 ± 12.2 11.9 ± 5.8 0.3(0.1,0.4) AIDS/≥3 1223.6 ± 465.5 877.9 ± 376.1 241.5 ± 105.9 69.4(60.7,78.6) 49.0 ± 12.5 13.1 ± 5.1 0.3(0.2,0.4) 备注:AIDS/1 45例;AIDS/2 30例;AIDS/≥3 51例。 -
[1] Ghosn J,Taiwo B,Seedat S,et al. HIV[J]. Lancet,2018,392(10148):685-697. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31311-4 [2] Lu D Y,Wu H Y,Yarla N S,et al. HAART in HIV/AIDS treatments:Future trends[J]. Infect Disord Drug Targets,2018,18(1):15-22. doi: 10.2174/1871526517666170505122800 [3] Cao W,Hsieh E,Li T. Optimizing treatment for adults with HIV/AIDS in China:Successes over two decades and remaining challenges[J]. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep,2020,17(1):26-34. doi: 10.1007/s11904-019-00478-x [4] Shmakova A,Germini D,Vassetzky Y. HIV-1,HAART and cancer:A complex relationship[J]. Int J Cancer,2020,146(10):2666-2679. doi: 10.1002/ijc.32730 [5] 郑艳,王志勇,陈橙,等. HIV感染者/AIDS患者高效抗逆转录病毒治疗感知效果影响因素分析[J]. 重庆医科大学学报,2021,46(4):493-498. [6] WS293-2019, 艾滋病和艾滋病病毒感染诊断[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2019. [7] 中华医学会感染病学分会艾滋病丙型肝炎学组,中国疾病预防与控制中心. 中国艾滋病诊疗指南(2018版)[J]. 中华传染病杂志,2018,36(12):705-724. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6680.2018.12.001 [8] Yang H Y,Beymer M R,Suen S C. Chronic disease onset among people living with HIV and AIDS in a large private insurance claims dataset[J]. Sci Rep,2019,9(1):18514. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-54969-3 [9] 中华人民共和国国家统计局. 中国统计年鉴[M]. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2019: 23-24. [10] 杜波,马玉霞,田晓东,等. 阜新市高效抗反转录病毒治疗的HIV/AIDS病人基因型耐药情况及影响因素[J]. 中国艾滋病性病,2020,26(8):814-818. [11] 周超,陈宗良,张维,等. 重庆市艾滋病抗病毒治疗新入组病人治疗效果及其影响因素分析[J]. 现代预防医学,2019,46(17):3091-3095. [12] Jia X C,Xia Z H,Shi N,et al. The factors associated with natural disease progression from HIV to AIDS in the absence of ART,a propensity score matching analysis[J]. Epidemiol Infect,2020,24(5):148-157. [13] Li Y Y,Yang S H,Wang R R,et al. Effects of CD4 cell count and antiretroviral therapy on mucocutaneous manifestations among HIV/AIDS patients in Yunnan,China[J]. Int J Dermatol,2020,59(3):308-313. doi: 10.1111/ijd.14725 [14] Yang X,Su B,Zhang X,et al. Incomplete immune reconstitution in HIV/AIDS patients on antiretroviral therapy:Challenges of immunological non-responders[J]. J Leukoc Biol,2020,107(4):597-612. doi: 10.1002/JLB.4MR1019-189R [15] 黄山,吕松琴,徐丽萍,等. 2015-2019年云南地区HIV感染者/AIDS患者合并感染病原微生物特征分析[J]. 临床检验杂志,2021,39(2):151-153. -