公众号 / 文章重症综合管理

唾液、抓伤、飞溅与针刺:急诊 HIV 暴露与 PEP

Spit, Scratch, Splash, Stick
RSS 订阅 · LITFL
一句话结论急诊决定是否 HIV PEP 只看两点:体液能否传播 HIV、是否到达易感部位;两者都满足才启动 PEP,且应尽快、不晚于 72 小时。

该文围绕急诊四种常见暴露——唾液入眼、抓伤破皮、血液飞溅至黏膜、空心针刺伤——阐述 HIV 暴露后预防(PEP)决策。唾液无可见血不属于可传播体液,无可见血或其他感染性体液的抓伤不构成暴露;血液溅入眼黏膜和空心针刺伤则是真正暴露。若暴露成立,应不晚于 72 小时启动 PEP,首剂不应等待源患者检测或基线化验,随后完成 28 天疗程并安排随访检测。文章依据 2025 年美国公共卫生服务职业 PEP 指南和 CDC 2025 nPEP 建议。

要点

  • 唾液无可见血不属于可传播 HIV 的体液,患者唾液溅入眼内不需 HIV PEP。
  • 抓伤仅破坏皮肤但指甲上无可传播体液时,不构成 HIV 暴露,不需 HIV PEP。
  • 含 HIV 血液溅入眼黏膜或空心针刺伤属于真正暴露,应考虑并启动 PEP;针刺经皮传播风险估计约 0.3%,黏膜暴露平均传播估计为 0.09%。
  • 启动 PEP 应尽快、不晚于 72 小时,首剂不应等待源患者检测或暴露者基线化验;完整疗程 28 天。
  • 不可将 U=U 直接外推到职业性针刺或其他肠道外暴露;源病毒载量检测不到时需寻求专家建议以决定是否启动或停止 PEP。

适用人群与场景

  • 急诊科或类似场景中发生体液、血液或锐器暴露的医护人员。
  • 暴露类型包括唾液入眼、抓伤破皮、血液溅入黏膜、空心针刺伤。
  • 涉及暴露风险决策的源患者包括 HIV 状态未知、已知 HIV 感染、接受抗逆转录病毒治疗并维持病毒抑制者。
  • 适用 PEP 评估的对象为暴露于可传播体液且到达易感部位的医护人员。

诊断标准与关键阈值

  • 启动 PEP 需同时满足:体液可传播 HIV,且到达易感部位。
  • 可传播 HIV 的体液包括:血液及任何可见血性体液、精液、前精液、阴道液、羊水、直肠液、脑脊液、滑液、胸水、腹水、心包液。
  • 不认为可传播 HIV 的体液包括:唾液、泪液、汗液、尿液、粪便、呕吐物、鼻腔分泌物和痰液。
  • 完整皮肤无公认传播风险;黏膜暴露和经皮损伤为易感途径。
  • PEP 启动时间窗为暴露后 72 小时内,越快越好;超过 72 小时一般不常规推荐,但暴露严重或情况特殊时寻求专家意见。
  • 如源患者随后确认 HIV 阴性,可停止 PEP,原文未给出具体停止标准。

处置流程与药物剂量

  • 第一步:如发生可传播体液到达易感部位的暴露,立即启动 PEP,首剂不应等待源患者检测或暴露者基线化验结果。
  • 第二步:尽快启动,最好数小时内、不晚于 72 小时;不论开始时间,完整疗程均为 28 天。
  • 第三步:对多数成人和青少年,当代 PEP 采用基于整合酶抑制剂的三药方案 28 天。
  • 整合酶抑制剂方案之一:比克替拉韦/恩曲他滨/替诺福韦艾拉酚胺,一片,每日一次,随餐或不随餐均可。
  • 整合酶抑制剂方案之二:多替拉韦联合(替诺福韦艾拉酚胺或富马酸替诺福韦二吡呋酯)联合(恩曲他滨或拉米夫定),原文未给出具体剂量。
  • 替代方案之一:当整合酶抑制剂方案不可用时,使用增效达芦那韦(与可比司他或利托那韦)联合两种 NRTI,原文未给出具体剂量。
  • 替代方案之二:如以上方案均不能使用,拉替拉韦联合恩曲他滨/替诺福韦仍有效,原文未给出具体剂量。
  • 第四步:源患者检测应紧急进行但不应延误 PEP,包括确认 HIV 状态、治疗史和可获取的病毒载量;若源患者后续确认 HIV 阴性,可停止 PEP。

红旗征与不能漏的情况

  • 空心针刺伤经皮暴露为最高风险,传播风险估计约 0.3%,应立即进入 PEP 流程。
  • 血液溅入眼黏膜属于确定的暴露,即使平均传播估计只有 0.09%,仍应按现行指南考虑或启动 PEP。
  • 超过 72 小时一般不再常规推荐 PEP,但暴露严重或情况特殊时必须寻求专家意见。
  • 不要将 U=U 直接用于职业暴露;病毒抑制仅表示传播生物学可能性显著降低,不能自动排除 PEP。
  • 妊娠期间可比司他增效方案血药浓度下降,不是首选;不应因妊娠或哺乳而延迟或拒绝 PEP。
  • 肾功能显著损害时含替诺福韦方案尤其是 TDF 需要调整剂量或避免使用。
  • 比克替拉韦和其他 INSTI 会与多价阳离子结合;与铝/镁抗酸剂需间隔服用,与钙或铁同用时应随餐服用。

研究设计与关键结果

  • 原文引用的经皮损伤 HIV 传播风险估计约 0.3%,依据 Cardo DM, 等. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(21):1485-1490 和 Kuhar DT, 等. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(9):875-892。
  • 黏膜暴露于含 HIV 血液的平均传播估计为 0.09%,原文未给出该估算的具体出处。
  • 美国监测记录 58 例确诊职业性 HIV 感染和约 150 例可能病例;1999 年后仅有 1 例确诊,为实验室活 HIV 培养物针刺。
  • 经典 CDC 病例对照研究显示,职业性经皮暴露后使用齐多夫定与 HIV 血清转换风险降低约 81% 相关。
  • HPTN 052、PARTNER、PARTNER2 和 Opposites Attract 等研究在病毒抑制的伴侣中未记录到基因相关的性传播,但这一证据限于性传播。
  • 全文为教学文章,无原始研究设计、样本量、干预对照或主要终点等研究型结果。

证据类型、等级与局限

  • 证据类型为教学文章/综述,依据 2025 年美国公共卫生服务职业 PEP 指南和 CDC 2025 nPEP 建议改编。
  • 经皮传播风险数据引用 Cardo DM 等的前瞻性病例对照研究及 Kuhar DT 等文献。
  • U=U 证据来自 HPTN 052、PARTNER、PARTNER2、Opposites Attract 等研究,原文未给出证据等级或推荐强度。
  • 原文明确局限:U=U 仅建立于性传播证据,未在职业性针刺或其他肠道外暴露中得到证实。
  • 原文未报告设计类型、样本量、中心数、盲法或不良事件等细节。

对床旁实践的改变

  • 急诊对唾液无可见血入眼、无感染性体液的抓伤在床旁可直接判断不需 HIV PEP,减少不必要的焦虑和处置。
  • 血液溅入黏膜或针刺伤后,床旁第一优先是尽快启动 PEP,而不是等待源患者 HIV 检测或基线化验。
  • 不能因源患者病毒载量检测不到就自动排除职业暴露 PEP,应及时寻求 HIV 专科建议。
  • PEP 首剂和咨询不应互相等待;无法立即获得专家意见时,有指征的 PEP 应先启动。
  • 对肾功能损害、肝功能损害、妊娠、哺乳或已在使用 PrEP 的暴露者,需要个体化选择方案或多学科咨询。

指南或共识出处

  • 2025 US Public Health Service occupational PEP guidelines
  • CDC 2025 nPEP recommendations
  • Cardo DM, et al. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(21):1485-1490
  • Kuhar DT, et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(9):875-892
全文中译19 节 · 点击展开
本译文由 AI 依据开放获取原文逐段翻译,供学习参考,可能存在误差,请以原文为准。原文 © Dakota Price(LITFL · Life in the Fast Lane),按 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可使用,本译文为翻译改编,并按相同许可提供。出处:Dakota Price,「Spit, Scratch, Splash, Stick」,LITFL · Life in the Fast Lane

急诊科中的HIV暴露

一名患者将唾液喷入你的眼睛。另一名患者抓伤了一名护士。血液飞溅到黏膜上。然后一根空心针刺穿手套。这四种情形都会引出同一个问题:“我需要HIV暴露后预防(PEP)吗?”

床旁决策归结为三件事:这种体液是否能够传播HIV?它是否到达了易感部位?如果两者都成立,PEP应多快启动?

本文追踪急诊科四种常见暴露——唾沫、抓伤、飞溅和针刺——从基本无HIV风险一直到分秒必争的暴露情形。

判断暴露是否需要PEP。体液类型和接触途径必须同时吻合,PEP才会被纳入考虑。改编自2025年美国公共卫生署职业性PEP指南和CDC 2025年非职业性PEP建议。

快照1——唾沫

一名患者在评估过程中直接将唾液吐入临床医生的眼睛。唾液中无可视血液。

你的第一反应可能是“黏膜暴露”,但途径只是等式的一半。

这种情况需要HIV PEP吗?

不需要。无可视血液的唾液不被视为可传播HIV的体液。

究竟什么能传播HIV?

血液及任何可见带血的体液;唾液、泪液、汗液

精液、前列腺液、阴道液、羊水和直肠液;尿液、粪便、呕吐物

脑脊液、滑液、胸腔积液、腹腔积液和心包积液;鼻腔分泌物和痰液

为什么重要

黏膜听起来令人警觉,但HIV风险同时需要感染性体液和进入门户。即使途径再“惊人”,错误的体液也不会因此变得有意义。

快照2——抓伤

在约束过程中,一名患者抓伤了护士的前臂。抓痕破皮,但指甲上无可视血液或其他感染性体液。

这种情况需要HIV PEP吗?

同样:不需要。

为什么重要

单纯的皮肤破损并不构成HIV暴露。还必须同时接触潜在感染性体液:指甲抓伤若无血液或其他感染性物质,不会传播HIV。

快照3——飞溅

在为一名已知HIV感染患者置管时,血液飞溅入临床医生的眼睛。

这是真正的HIV暴露吗?

是的。

风险有多大?

完整皮肤:无公认的传播风险

风险不等同于PEP指征。0.09%的平均传播估计值听起来很小,但对含HIV血液的明确黏膜暴露,按照现行指南仍应被考虑/启动PEP。

如果来源病毒载量检测不到呢?

病毒抑制大大降低了传播的生物学合理性,但U=U不能简单地外推到职业性接种。在决定是否需要PEP或是否可以停止时,应寻求专家建议。

什么是U=U?

检测不到=不传染(U=U)是指HIV感染者接受抗反转录病毒治疗并维持病毒抑制后,不会通过性行为传播HIV。

包括HPTN 052、PARTNER、PARTNER2和Opposites Attract在内的大型研究记录了当HIV感染一方处于病毒抑制状态时,没有发生基因关联的性传播。

但U=U是基于性传播的证据。对于职业性针刺或其他胃肠外暴露,这一点尚未确立,因此来源病毒载量检测不到应调整风险评估,而不是自动排除PEP。

这种暴露进入PEP路径。其原则与后面的针刺伤相同,我们将在那里逐步介绍处理流程。

快照4——针刺

在为一名已知感染HIV的患者静脉穿刺后,一根空心针立即穿透手套。

风险有多大?

约0.3%

按途径划分的每次暴露估计HIV传播风险(%)。经皮损伤风险最高;完整皮肤无风险。数据来自Cardo DM等,N Engl J Med. 1997;337(21):1485-1490及Kuhar DT等,Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(9):875-892。

风险背景

职业性HIV传播目前已不常见。美国监测记录了58例确诊的职业感染和约150例可能病例。1999年后仅发生1例确诊病例,为实验室针刺伤,涉及活HIV培养物。

PEP有效。在经典的CDC病例对照研究中,职业性经皮暴露后使用齐多夫定与HIV血清阳转几率降低约81%相关。当代三药方案因具有更强的抗病毒效力、耐受性和耐药屏障而成为首选。

你应该怎么做?

先治疗,后澄清细节。

1. 开始治疗

尽快启动PEP。理想情况下在暴露后数小时内启动,不迟于72小时。不要等待源患者检测或基线实验室结果再给予首剂。

PEP时间窗。在72小时截止期内,越早越好。无论开始时间如何,完整疗程仍为28天。示意图,未按比例绘制。改编自2025年美国公共卫生服务职业PEP指南。

超过72小时:PEP一般不建议常规使用,但当暴露程度严重或情况特殊时,应寻求专家建议。

对于大多数成人和青少年,当代PEP采用基于整合酶抑制剂的三药方案,持续28天。

基于整合酶抑制剂的方案

比克替拉韦/恩曲他滨/丙酚替诺福韦:每日1片,每日1次,随餐或空腹服用均可。

多替拉韦加(丙酚替诺福韦或富马酸替诺福韦二吡呋酯)加(恩曲他滨或拉米夫定)。

替代方案

增强型达芦那韦(联合考比司他或利托那韦)加两种NRTI,适用于无法使用基于整合酶抑制剂方案的情况。

如果上述两种方案均无法给予,拉替拉韦加恩曲他滨/替诺福韦仍然有效。

源患者

在可获得的情况下,确定HIV状态、治疗史和病毒载量。

源患者检测应紧急进行,但不应延误PEP。

如果源患者随后被确认HIV阴性,可停止PEP。

暴露的医务人员

获取基线HIV抗原/抗体检测、肾功能和肝功能以及相关情况下的妊娠检测。

基线结果有助于确定首选方案是否仍然适用,但同样不应延误首剂给药。

3. 判断是否有任何因素改变路径

a. 病毒载量不可检出。病毒持续受抑制的源患者需要更细致的评估。应寻求专家建议,而不是将U=U直接外推到职业性接种。

b. 肾/肝功能损害。含替诺福韦的方案(尤其是TDF)在显著肾功能损害时需要调整剂量或避免使用。增强型PI方案经肝脏代谢,肝功能不全时需谨慎。存在上述任一情况时,应请药师或HIV专科医师参与选择和调整替代方案的剂量。

c. 妊娠/哺乳。与其他任何暴露的工作人员一样处理。不要暂缓或延迟暴露后预防(PEP)。在启动时应请HIV专科医生参与,因为指南将妊娠和哺乳列于需要会诊的情形之中。考比司他增效方案在妊娠期药物水平降低,不作为首选。对于正在哺乳的工作人员,应通过咨询支持其共同决策,决定在服用PEP期间继续还是中断哺乳。

PEP要点:比克替拉韦及其他整合酶链转移抑制剂(INSTIs)可与多价阳离子结合。应与铝/镁抗酸剂分开服用(服抗酸剂前2小时或后6小时),与钙剂或铁剂同服时需随餐服用。一种出于好意的抗酸剂也可能降低药物水平。

d. 正在使用PrEP。如果暴露的医务人员已在服用暴露前预防(PrEP),应明确其方案和依从性。可寻求专家建议,以确定是否需要额外的PEP。

需要帮助?

美国国家临床医生咨询中心PEP热线(1-888-448-4911)可提供职业性PEP专家建议。如果无法立即获得会诊,不要在等待专家建议期间延迟有指征的PEP。

4. 完成全程

如果PEP仍有指征,应完成28天疗程。依从性很重要,因为漏服或延迟启动可能影响后续随访检测。

5. 安排随访

对于暴露后超过24小时才开始PEP或存在漏服的人员,建议在4~6周时进行额外检测。

最终检测包括暴露后12周时进行HIV抗原/抗体联合检测加核酸检测。

对于耐受治疗且基线结果正常的患者,无需常规重复肾功能和肝功能检测。重复肌酐、AST和ALT检测取决于基线值异常或症状。

HIV暴露评估不在于事件看起来是否可怕,而在于感染性体液是否到达易感部位。唾液和抓伤会引起焦虑,但通常不构成HIV风险。血液接触黏膜或通过针刺进入体内则改变了性质。一旦PEP有指征,速度至关重要。

结论

唾液、抓伤、飞溅和针刺可能引起程度截然不同的焦虑,但评估是相同的:该体液是否能够传播HIV,以及它是否到达了易感部位?

如果两者均成立,应评估来源并立即启动有指征的PEP,而不是等待完备的信息。

本文随Dakota Price医学博士主讲的初级保健中的HIV课程一并提供。关于HIV筛查、诊断、分期和管理的更全面方法,请参阅该课程。

原文篇幅较长或含参考文献等附属内容,只翻译了正文部分,其余请阅读原文。

原文图文 · 图 2 张

Spit, Scratch, Splash, Stick

Dakota Price

Sep 23, 2026

Home LITFL Clinical Cases

HIV exposures in the ED

A patient spits in your eye. Another scratches a nurse. Blood splashes onto a mucous membrane. Then a hollow-bore needle goes through a glove. All four scenarios prompt the same question “Do I need HIV PEP?“.

The bedside decision comes down to three things: Was the fluid capable of transmitting HIV? Did it reach a susceptible site? and, if both are true, how quickly should PEP start?

This article follows four common ED exposures — spit, scratch, splash and stick — from essentially no HIV risk through to the exposure where minutes matter.

Deciding whether an exposure needs PEP. The fluid type and the route of contact both have to line up before PEP is on the table. Adapted from the 2025 US Public Health Service occupational PEP guidelines and CDC 2025 nPEP recommendations.

Snapshot 1 — Spit

A patient spits directly into a clinician’s eye during an assessment. There is no visible blood in the saliva.

Your immediate instinct may be to think “mucous-membrane exposure”, but the route is only half the equation.

Does this need HIV PEP?

No. Saliva without visible blood is not considered an HIV-transmitting fluid.

What actually transmits HIV?

Potentially infectiousNOT infectious, unless visibly bloody

Blood and any visibly bloody fluidSaliva, tears, sweat

Semen, pre-seminal, vaginal, amniotic and rectal fluidsUrine, faeces, vomitus

Cerebrospinal, synovial, pleural, peritoneal and pericardialNasal secretions and sputum

Why it matters

The mucous membrane sounds alarming, but HIV risk requires both an infectious fluid and a portal of entry. Exposure to the wrong fluid is not rescued into significance by an impressive route.

Snapshot 2 — Scratch

During restraint, a patient scratches a nurse’s forearm. The scratch breaks the skin, but there is no visible blood or other infectious body fluid on the fingernails.

Does this need HIV PEP?

Again: No.

Why it matters

Broken skin alone does not create an HIV exposure. There must also be contact with potentially infectious fluid: a scratch from fingernails without blood or other infectious material does not transmit HIV.

Snapshot 3 — Splash

Blood splashes into a clinician’s eye while a line is being inserted in a patient known to have HIV.

Is this a real HIV exposure?

Yes.

How big is the risk?

Mucous membrane: ~0.09%

Non-intact skin: lower, but poorly quantified

Intact skin: no recognised transmission risk

Risk is not the same thing as indication for PEP. A 0.09% average transmission estimate sounds small, but a recognised mucous-membrane exposure to HIV-containing blood is still an exposure for which PEP should be considered/commenced according to current guidance.

What about an undetectable source viral load?

Viral suppression substantially reduces the biological plausibility of transmission, but U=U cannot simply be extrapolated to occupational inoculation. Seek expert advice when deciding whether PEP is required or can be discontinued.

What is U=U?

Undetectable = Untransmittable (U=U) means that a person with HIV who takes antiretroviral therapy and maintains viral suppression does not transmit HIV through sex.

Large studies including HPTN 052, PARTNER, PARTNER2 and Opposites Attract documented no genetically linked sexual transmissions when the partner with HIV was virally suppressed.

But U=U is a sexual-transmission evidence base. It has not been established for occupational needlestick or other parenteral exposures, so an undetectable source viral load should modify the risk assessment rather than automatically exclude PEP.

This exposure enters the PEP pathway. The principles are the same as for the needlestick that follows, where we will work through the management step by step.

Snapshot 4 — Stick

A hollow-bore needle passes through a glove immediately after venepuncture from a patient known to have HIV.

How big is the risk?

~0.3%

Estimated HIV transmission risk per exposure (%), by route. Percutaneous injury carries the highest risk; intact skin carries none. Data from Cardo DM, et al. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(21):1485-1490 and Kuhar DT, et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(9):875-892.

Risk in context

Occupational HIV transmission is now uncommon. US surveillance has documented 58 confirmed occupational infections and approximately 150 possible cases. Only one confirmed case occurred after 1999, following a laboratory needlestick involving live HIV culture.

PEP works. In the classic CDC case-control study, zidovudine use after occupational percutaneous exposure was associated with an approximately 81% reduction in the odds of HIV seroconversion. Contemporary three-drug regimens are preferred because of their greater antiviral potency, tolerability and resistance barrier.

What should you do?

Treat first, clarify the details second.

1. Start treatment

Start PEP as soon as possible. Ideally within hours and no later than 72 hours after the exposure. Do not wait for source-patient testing or baseline laboratory results before giving the first dose.

The PEP window. Earlier is always better within the 72-hour cutoff. The full course still runs 28 days regardless of start time. Schematic, not drawn to scale. Adapted from the 2025 US Public Health Service occupational PEP guidelines.

Beyond 72 hours: PEP is generally not recommended routinely, but seek expert advice when the exposure is substantial or circumstances are unusual.

For most adults and adolescents, contemporary PEP uses a three-drug integrase inhibitor-based regimen for 28 days.

Choosing a PEP regimen

Integrase inhibitor-based regimens

Bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide: one tablet, once daily, with or without food.

Dolutegravir plus (tenofovir alafenamide or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) plus (emtricitabine or lamivudine).

Alternative regimens

Boosted darunavir (with cobicistat or ritonavir) plus two NRTIs, when an integrase inhibitor-based regimen is not available.

Raltegravir plus emtricitabine/tenofovir remains effective if neither of the above can be given.

2. Test the source and the exposed clinician

Source

Establish HIV status, treatment history and viral load where available.

Source testing should proceed urgently, but it should not delay PEP.

If the source is subsequently confirmed HIV-negative, PEP can be stopped.

Exposed healthcare worker

Obtain baseline HIV Ag/Ab testing, renal and liver function and pregnancy testing where relevant.

Baseline results help determine whether the preferred regimen remains appropriate, but again should not delay the first dose.

3. Decide whether anything changes the pathway

a. Undetectable viral load. A source with sustained viral suppression requires a more nuanced assessment. Seek expert advice rather than extrapolating U=U directly to occupational inoculation.

b. Renal/hepatic impairment. Tenofovir-containing regimens (TDF in particular) require dose adjustment or avoidance in significant renal impairment. Boosted PI regimens undergo hepatic metabolism and warrant caution in hepatic dysfunction. When either is present, involve a pharmacist or HIV specialist to select and dose an alternative regimen.

c. Pregnancy/breastfeeding. Treat the same as any other exposed worker. Do not withhold or delay PEP. Involve an HIV specialist at initiation, since guidelines name pregnancy and breastfeeding among the scenarios warranting consultation. Cobicistat-boosted regimens have reduced drug levels in pregnancy and are not preferred. For a breastfeeding worker, counseling should support shared decision-making about continuing versus interrupting breastfeeding while on PEP.

PEP pearl: Bictegravir and other INSTIs bind polyvalent cations. Separate from aluminum/magnesium antacids (2 hours before or 6 hours after), and take with food when given alongside calcium or iron. A well-meant antacid can drop drug levels

d. Existing PrEP. If the exposed healthcare worker is already taking PrEP, establish the regimen and adherence. Expert advice may be appropriate to determine whether additional PEP is required.

Need help?

The US National Clinician Consultation Center PEPline (1-888-448-4911) provides expert occupational PEP advice. If consultation is not immediately available, do not delay indicated PEP while waiting for specialist advice.

4. Complete the course

If PEP remains indicated, complete the 28-day course. Compliance matters as missed doses or delayed initiation may alter subsequent follow-up testing.

5. Arrange follow-up

Additional testing at 4–6 weeks is recommended for personnel who began PEP more than 24 hours after exposure or who missed doses.

Final testing consists of HIV Ag/Ab plus nucleic acid testing at 12 weeks after exposure.

Routine repeat renal and hepatic testing is unnecessary in a patient tolerating treatment with normal baseline results. Repeat creatinine, AST, and ALT testing is driven by abnormal baseline values or symptoms.

HIV exposure assessment is not about whether an event looks frightening. It is about whether an infectious fluid reached a susceptible site. Spit and scratches generate anxiety but usually no HIV risk. Blood to a mucous membrane or through a needle changes the equation. Once PEP is indicated, speed matters.

CONCLUSION

Spit, scratch, splash and stick may provoke very different levels of anxiety, but the assessment is the same: Was the fluid capable of transmitting HIV, and did it reach a susceptible site?

If both are true, assess the source and start indicated PEP promptly rather than waiting for perfect information.

This article accompanies the HIV in Primary Care course by Dakota Price, MD. For a fuller approach to screening, diagnosis, staging and management of HIV.

References

HIV specific clinical cases

Price D. The Mono That Wasn’t. LITFL

Price D. Spit, Scratch, Splash, Stick. LITFL

Guidelines and recommendations

Kofman AD, Struble KA, Heneine W, et al. 2025 US Public Health Service Guidelines for the Management of Occupational Exposures to Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Recommendations for Post-exposure Prophylaxis in Healthcare Settings. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2025;46(9):863-873.

Tanner MR, O’Shea JG, Byrd KM, Johnston M, Dumitru GG, Le JN, Lale A, Byrd KK, Cholli P, Kamitani E, Zhu W, Hoover KW, Kourtis AP. Antiretroviral Postexposure Prophylaxis After Sexual, Injection Drug Use, or Other Nonoccupational Exposure to HIV – CDC Recommendations, United States, 2025. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2025 May 8;74(1):1-56.

Kuhar DT, Henderson DK, Struble KA, Heneine W, Thomas V, Cheever LW, Gomaa A, Panlilio AL; US Public Health Service Working Group. Updated US Public Health Service guidelines for the management of occupational exposures to human immunodeficiency virus and recommendations for postexposure prophylaxis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013 Sep;34(9):875-92 [Source of the 0.09% mucous-membrane transmission estimate]

Key papers and surveillance

Cardo DM, Culver DH, Ciesielski CA, Srivastava PU, Marcus R, Abiteboul D, Heptonstall J, Ippolito G, Lot F, McKibben PS, Bell DM. A case-control study of HIV seroconversion in health care workers after percutaneous exposure. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Needlestick Surveillance Group. N Engl J Med. 1997 Nov 20;337(21):1485-90.

Joyce MP, Kuhar D, Brooks JT. Notes from the field: occupationally acquired HIV infection among health care workers – United States, 1985-2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Jan 9;63(53):1245-6.

Eisinger RW, Dieffenbach CW, Fauci AS. HIV Viral Load and Transmissibility of HIV Infection: Undetectable Equals Untransmittable. JAMA. 2019 Feb 5;321(5):451-452.

Clinical resources

National Clinician Consultation Center. PEPline: 1-888-448-4911. (accessed 2026).

CDC. HIV Occupational Transmission: confirmed and possible cases among US healthcare personnel. (accessed 2026)

New York State Department of Health AIDS Institute. U=U Guidance for Implementation in Clinical Settings. hivguidelines.org (accessed 2026)

CLINICAL CASES

Microbial Mystery

More Clinical Cases

来源:LITFL,查看原文。版权归原作者所有。

参考来源

  1. Life in the Fast Lane • LITFL:Spit, Scratch, Splash, Stick
  2. 全文:LITFL(CC BY-NC-SA 4.0,署名:Dakota Price)https://litfl.com/spit-scratch-splash-stick/

供执业医师抢救与诊疗参考,不替代临床判断;剂量请结合体重、肝肾功能和本院药品规格复核,以指南原文为准。