宫颈上皮内瘤变锥切术后HPV感染情况及关联因素分析

Factors associated with HPV infection after cervical conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

  • 摘要:
    背景 宫颈上皮内瘤变(cervical intraepithelial neoplasia,CIN)患者行宫颈锥切术后仍有人乳头瘤病毒(human papillomavirus,HPV)持续感染的问题,对于这部分患者的感染情况及关联因素仍未达成共识。
    目的 比较宫颈锥切术治疗CIN后HPV持续感染资料,并进行关联因素分析。
    方法 回顾性分析 2017年9月 — 2021年12月在解放军总医院第一医学中心妇产科行宫颈锥切术并参与术后随访至少1次的CIN患者临床资料,汇总其基本信息、术前HPV感染分型、手术及病理信息、术后HPV持续感染分型、术后疫苗接种信息,分析术后HPV持续阳性的相关因素。
    结果 共纳入1 895例患者,术前HPV阳性率为79.37%,29.45%为HPV多重感染。锥切术后复查HPV阳性358例,阳性率达18.89%。术后HPV阳性组与阴性组相比,HPV16/18高危类型占比较高(60.61% vs 37.80%,P<0.001);两组术前病理类型、手术前后病理级别差异、锥切直径3个病理指标差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后3 ~ 6个月首次随访:首次复查HPV阳性组251例,其中与术前HPV分型不相同的有110例;后续随访转阳组107例,与术前HPV分型不相同的有66例。追踪部分被随访者HPV疫苗接种情况:相对于未注射疫苗的被随访者,锥切术后接种疫苗者HPV感染率显著偏低(6.49% vs 19.72%,P=0.004)。多因素Logistic回归分析结果显示:对术后HPV感染而言,术后病理级别(加重)的患者出现HPV感染的概率更高(OR=2.054;95% CI:1.424 ~ 2.964),接种疫苗的患者感染概率较低(OR=0.276;95% CI:0.110 ~ 0.695)。
    结论 锥切术后HPV感染比例较高,术后病理级别提高的患者更容易再次感染,而接种HPV疫苗对预防HPV持续感染具有显著效果。

     

    Abstract:
    Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection may exist after cervical conectomy for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). There is still no consensus on the infection status and associated factors in these patients.
    Objective To compare the data of persistent HPV infection after cervical conectomy for CIN and analyze the associated factors.
    Methods Clinical data about 1 895 CIN patients who underwent cervical conectomy in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital from September 2017 to December 2021 and participated in postoperative follow-up at least once were retrospectively analyzed. The basic information, preoperative HPV infection type, surgical and pathological information, postoperative HPV persistent infection type, postoperative vaccination information were summarized, and the related factors of postoperative HPV persistent positive were analyzed.
    Results The preoperative HPV positive rate was 79.37%, and 29.45% of them were HPV multiple infections. After conization, 358 cases were found to be HPV positive upon follow-up, resulting in a positivity rate of 18.89%. Compared to the postoperative HPV-negative group, the HPV-positive group had a higher proportion of high-risk types HPV16/18 (60.61% vs 37.80%, P < 0.001). There were statistically significant differences in preoperative pathological types, differences in pathological grades before and after surgery, and conization diameter among the two groups (P < 0.05). In the first follow-up conducted 3 to 6 months post-surgery, 251 cases in the HPV-positive group were re-examined, of which 110 had different HPV typing compared to preoperative results; in the subsequent follow-up, 107 cases in the conversion group had different HPV typing compared to preoperative results. Tracking the HPV vaccination status of some participants: compared to the participants who did not receive the vaccine, those vaccinated after conization had a significantly lower HPV infection rate (6.49% vs 19.72%, P=0.004). Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that for postoperative HPV infection, patients with an increased postoperative pathological grade had a higher probability of HPV infection (OR=2.054; 95% CI: 1.424 - 2.964), while vaccinated patients had a lower probability of infection (OR=0.276; 95% CI: 0.110 - 0.695).
    Conclusion The probability of HPV reinfection is high after conization, and patients with an increase in postoperative pathological grade are more susceptible to reinfection. Additionally, receiving the HPV vaccine has a significant effect on preventing HPV reinfection.

     

/

返回文章
返回