Prevalence and resistance mutations of non-B HIV-1 subtypes among immigrants in Southern Spain along the decade 2000-2010.

Most of the non-B HIV-1 subtypes are predominant in Sub-Saharan Africa and India although they have been found worldwide. In the last decade, immigration from these areas has increased considerably in Spain. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of non-B subtypes circulating in a cohort of HIV-1-infected immigrants in Seville, Southern Spain and to identify drug resistance-associated mutations. METHODS: Complete protease and first 220 codons of the reverse transcriptase coding regions were amplified and sequenced by population sequencing. HIV-1 subtypes were determined using Stanford University Drug Resistance Database, and phylogenetic analysis was performed comparing multiple reported sequences. Drug resistance mutations were defined according to the International AIDS Society-USA. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2010 a total of 1,089 newly diagnosed HIV-1-infected patients were enrolled in our cohort. Of these, 121 were immigrants, of which 98 had ethical approval and informed consent to include in our study. Twenty-nine immigrants (29/98, 29.6%) were infected with non-B subtypes, of which 15/29 (51.7%) were CRF02-AG, mostly from Sub-Saharan Africa, and 2/29 (6.9%) were CRF01-AE from Eastern Europe. A, C, F, J and G subtypes from Eastern Europe, Central-South America and Sub-Saharan Africa were also present. Some others harboured recombinant forms CRF02-AG/CRF01-AE, CRF2-AG/G and F/B, B/C, and K/G, in PR and RT-coding regions. Patients infected with non-B subtypes showed a high frequency of minor protease inhibitor resistance mutations, M36I, L63P, and K20R/I. Only one patient, CRF02_AG, showed major resistance mutation L90M. Major RT inhibitor resistance mutations K70R and A98G were present in one patient with subtype G, L100I in one patient with CRF01_AE, and K103N in another patient with CRF01_AE. Three patients had other mutations such as V118I, E138A and V90I. CONCLUSIONS: The circulation of non-B subtypes has significantly increased in Southern Spain during the last decade, with 29.6% prevalence, in association with demographic changes among immigrants. This could be an issue in the treatment and management of these patients. Resistance mutations have been detected in these patients with a prevalence of 7% among treatment-naïve patients compared with the 21% detected among patients under HAART or during treatment interruption.

Iron deficiency and anaemia in bariatric surgical patients: causes, diagnosis and proper management

Obesity-induced chronic inflammation leads to activation of the immune system that causes alterations of iron homeostasis including hypoferraemia, iron-restricted erythropoiesis, and finally mild-to-moderate anaemia. Thus, preoperative anaemia and iron deficiency are common among obese patients scheduled for bariatric surgery (BS). Assessment of patients should include a complete haematological and biochemical laboratory work-up, including measurement of iron stores, vitamin B12 and folate. In addition, gastrointestinal evaluation is recommended for most patients with iron-deficiency anaemia. On the other hand, BS is a long-lasting inflammatory stimulus in itself and entails a reduction of the gastric capacity and/or exclusion from the gastrointestinal tract which impair nutrients absorption, including dietary iron. Chronic gastrointestinal blood loss and iron-losingenteropathy may also contribute to iron deficiency after BS. Perioperative anaemia has been linked to increased postoperative morbidity and mortality and decreased quality of life after major surgery, whereas treatment of perioperative anaemia, and even haematinic deficiency without anaemia, has been shown to improve patient outcomes and quality of life. However, long-term follow-up data in regard to prevalence, severity, and causes of anaemia after BS are mostly absent. Iron supplements should be administered to patients after BS, but compliance with oral iron is no good. In addition, once iron deficiency has developed, it may prove refractory to oral treatment. In these situations, IV iron (which can circumvent the iron blockade at enterocytes and macrophages) has emerged as a safe and effective alternative for perioperative anaemia management. Monitoring should continue indefinitely even after the initial iron repletion and anaemia resolution, and maintenance IV iron treatment should be provided as required. New IV preparations, such ferric carboxymaltose, are safe, easy to use and up to 1000 mg can be given in a single session, thus providing an excellent tool to avoid or treat iron deficiency in this patient population.

Management of hepatitis B virus infection after liver transplantation.

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is responsible for up to 30% of cases of liver cirrhosis and up to 53% of cases of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver transplantation (LT) is the best therapeutic option for patients with end-stage liver failure caused by HBV. The success of transplantation, though, depends on receiving prophylactic treatment against post-transplant viral reactivation. In the absence of prophylaxis, liver transplantation due to chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is associated with high rates of viral recurrence and poor survival. The introduction of treatment with hepatitis B immunoglobulins (HBIG) during the 1990s and later the incorporation of oral antiviral drugs have improved the prognosis of these patients. Thus, LT for CHB is now a universally accepted option, with an estimated 5 years survival of around 85% vs the 45% survival seen prior to the introduction of HBIG. The combination of lamivudine plus HBIG has for many years been the most widely used prophylactic regimen. However, with the appearance of new more potent oral antiviral agents associated with less resistance (e.g., entecavir and tenofovir) for the treatment of CHB, new prophylactic strategies are being designed, either in combination with HBIG or alone as a monotherapy. These advances have allowed for more personalized prophylaxis based on the individual risk profile of a given patient. In addition, the small pool of donors has required the use of anti-HBc-positive donors (with the resulting possibility of transmitting HBV from these organs), which has been made possible by suitable prophylactic regimens.