STI pathogens in the oropharynx: update on screening and treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The rise in antimicrobial resistance in several STI pathogens such as Neisseria gonorrhoeae has become a public health threat as only one first-line treatment remains. Reducing screening interval for gonorrhoea and chlamydia in high-prevalence populations has been proposed to address antimicrobial stewardship, but this remains controversial. This review aimed to revisit the epidemiology of infections at the oropharynx and review the current screening recommendations and treatment guidelines in different populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Emerging evidence suggests that the oropharynx is the primary anatomical site for gonorrhoea transmission but maybe not for chlamydia transmission. Most international guidelines recommend 3-monthly oropharyngeal gonorrhoea and chlamydia screening for high-prevalence populations (e.g. men who have sex with men) but not low-prevalence populations (e.g. heterosexuals) given the clinical and public health benefits of screening in low-prevalence populations are still unclear. Doxycycline remains the first-line treatment for oropharyngeal chlamydia in most guidelines. However, some countries have moved from dual therapy (ceftriaxone and azithromycin) to monotherapy (ceftriaxone) for oropharyngeal gonorrhoea treatment to address antimicrobial stewardship.

SUMMARY

The transmission of gonorrhoea and chlamydia is still not fully understood. Further work will be required to evaluate the benefits and harms of reducing screening in high-prevalence populations.

Factors Associated With Consenting to Receive an Automated Email Summary After a Sexual Health Clinic Visit

BACKGROUND

Electronic health records allow for inexpensive communication with patients. In March 2021, the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre implemented an automated email summary ("Sexual Health Automated Visit Email" [SHAVE]) of a client's visit. This study evaluates the proportion of attendees at a sexual health service who opted in or out of SHAVE.

METHODS

This study was conducted at the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre in Australia between March 2021 and June 2022. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to examine the client characteristics associated with consenting to SHAVE.

RESULTS

There were 18,528 clients (men, 12,700; women, 5828) included in the final analysis and 55.2% (n = 10,233) consented to receiving SHAVE. Comparing with those who did not have a new sexually transmitted infection diagnosis, clients with a new diagnosis of a sexually transmitted infection, but not HIV, had lower odds of consenting to receiving SHAVE (chlamydia: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.64 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.57-0.72]; gonorrhea: aOR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62-0.82]; syphilis: aOR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59-0.96]). Men had lower odds of consenting when compared with women (men who have sex with women only: aOR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.71-0.84]; men who have sex with men: aOR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.62-0.75]). Comparing with those born in Australia or Oceania, clients born in Europe had lower odds of consenting (aOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.94), whereas those born in Latin America or Caribbean had higher odds of consenting (aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04-1.51).

CONCLUSIONS

Email summaries may serve as a valuable strategy to improve health communication and record keeping for clients. Understanding the client characteristics associated with consenting SHAVE will allow for the implementation of strategies to better communicate with clients.

A Systematic Review of Kissing as a Risk Factor for Oropharyngeal Gonorrhea or Chlamydia

BACKGROUND

Tongue kissing is a poorly studied risk factor for sexually transmitted infections (STIs). We undertook the first systematic review to assess whether kissing is a risk factor for gonorrhea or chlamydia of the oropharynx.

METHODS

Online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane) and reference lists were searched until September 30, 2022. The eligibility criteria for studies included: any peer-reviewed study design in the English language; gonorrhea or chlamydia diagnosed by nucleic acid amplification test, or an infection self-reported by a patient; tongue kissing or its equivalent measured as an exposure. Studies were appraised using a quality scoring tool and qualitatively synthesized.

RESULTS

Of 8248 studies screened, 6 were eligible for review. All were conducted among men who have sex with men in Australia, including 3 prospective cohort studies, 2 cross-sectional studies, and 1 age-matched case-control study. In summary, all 5 studies examining gonorrhea found an unadjusted association between kissing and oropharyngeal gonorrhea. Two cross-sectional studies found that tongue kissing was an independent risk factor for oropharyngeal gonorrhea after adjusting for other confounders, such as participant demographic characteristics and other sexual practices. In contrast, a single eligible prospective cohort study found no association between kissing and oropharyngeal chlamydia.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review summarized the existing evidence that suggests that tongue kissing may be a risk factor for oropharyngeal gonorrhea but not chlamydia. Reinforcing the message that oropharyngeal gonorrhea could be transmitted through kissing may inform the development of novel approaches to prevent and treat gonorrhea.

The duration and body position during tongue-kissing among heterosexual men and women

Background

Emerging data suggest tongue-kissing may transmit gonorrhea. We aim to examine the duration or body position of heterosexual men and women during tongue-kissing (henceforth, known as kissing).

Methods

A cross-sectional survey among heterosexual men and women attending the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre in Australia between May 2019 and March 2020 collected data on the duration and body position (i.e., on top of or lying down underneath) of their most recent kissing partner in the past 3 months. Univariable and multivariable linear regressions were performed to examine the association between gender and kissing duration.

Results

Of 2,866 individuals, 93.6% (n = 2,683) had at least one kissing partner in the past 3 months, which included 1,342 (50.1%) men and 1,341 (49.9%) women, and 87.2% (n = 2,339) had sex with their opposite-gender kissing partner. The adjusted mean duration of kissing with the most recent opposite-gender kissing partner did not differ between men and women (12.2 vs. 11.5 min, p = 0.170). More men were on top of their most recent opposite-gender kissing partner compared to women (87.9 vs. 82.9%, p < 0.001). Men reported a longer kissing duration than women when they were on top of the opposite-gender kissing partner (8.3 vs. 7.4 min, p = 0.006). More women had same-gender kissing partners than men (9.6 vs. 2.8%, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Men spending longer than women on top of their opposite-gender kissing partner suggests a potential alternative explanation for oropharyngeal gonorrhea being seen more commonly in women. Further research should investigate whether body positioning and duration of kissing influence the risk of gonorrhea transmission.

A cross-sectional study of male and female kissing partners among men who have sex with men

BACKGROUND

Kissing may be a risk factor for gonorrhoea. Past studies have focused on male kissing partners among men who have sex with men (MSM). This study aimed to examine the kissing practices of MSM who kiss male and female partners.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey at the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre (MSHC) between March and April 2019. Men attending the MSHC, aged ≥16years who reported any sexual contact with another man in the previous 12months were invited to participate in the survey. Data about the number of kissing-only (kissing without sex), kissing-with-sex, and sex-only (having sex without kissing) partners in the previous 3months were collected. Men were asked to report the number of male and female partners separately.

RESULTS

There were 357 MSM included in the survey. Most men (97.2%, n=347) had kissed or had sex with another man, whereas 16.0% (n=57) had kissed or had sex with a female partner in the previous 3months. Of the 57 men, 26.3% (n=15) had only kissed a female partner without having sex. The mean number of male partners for kissing-only was 5.5 (s.d.=6.6), kissing-with-sex was 5.0 (s.d.=6.6) and sex-only was 3.9 (s.d.=4.3). The mean number of female partners for kissing-only was 4.2 (s.d.=6.9), kissing-with-sex was 3.8 (s.d.=4.9) and sex-only was 3.2 (s.d.=3.4).

CONCLUSION

MSM not only kiss men in the absence of sex, but also kiss women in the absence of sex. Gonorrhoea could be transmitted between MSM and women via kissing in the absence of sex.

Oral, Vaginal and Anal Sexual Practices among Heterosexual Males and Females Attending a Sexual Health Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Survey in Melbourne, Australia

Sex practices among heterosexuals are not well studied. We aimed to explore sexual practices among heterosexuals attending a sexual health clinic. This cross-sectional survey was conducted at Melbourne Sexual Health Centre between March and April 2019. Data were collected on kissing, oral sex (fellatio or cunnilingus), vaginal sex, anal sex and rimming in the previous 3 months. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the associations between engaging in anal sex and other sex practices. There were 709 participants (333 men; 376 women) who were eligible and completed the survey (response rate was 24.6%). In the past 3 months, most participants had had vaginal sex (n = 677; 95.5%), with a mean of 3.0 (standard deviation (SD): 3.9) vaginal sex partners, and half reported engaging in condomless vaginal sex in the past 3 months (n = 358; 50.1%). A total of 135 (19.0%) participants had had anal sex, with a mean of 1.3 (SD: 1.0) anal sex partners, with 63.5% (n = 94) engaging in any condomless anal sex in the past 3 months. Most participants (n = 637, 89.8%) had received oral sex in the past 3 months; this proportion did not differ by age group or gender. Women (n = 351, 93.4%) were more likely to perform oral sex than men (n = 275; 82.6% men) (p < 0.001) and to have received rimming (26.6% women vs. 12.6% men; p < 0.001). Men were more likely to have performed rimming (25.5% men vs. 9.3% women; p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, number of partners and sexual practice, anal sex was associated with being ≥35 years (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 2.3; 95% CI: 1.2–4.2), receiving rimming (aOR: 3.8; 95% CI: 2.4–6.0) and performing rimming (aOR: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.8–4.6). Rimming and anal sex are practiced by one-fifth or more of heterosexuals. Older heterosexuals were more likely to engage in anal sex and to perform rimming. Future research should consider the benefits of testing extragenital sites where appropriate.

Brief Report: Group Sex Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in the Era of PrEP: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Group sex has been commonly reported among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men (GBMSM); however, there are limited studies on the factors associated with participating in group sex.

SETTING

A cross-sectional study among GBMSM attending a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia.

METHODS

Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were performed to examine the association between GBMSM participating in group sex in the previous 3 months and their demographic characteristics, including age, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use, HIV status, any STI (gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis) diagnosis on the day, and method of seeking partners.

RESULTS

There were 357 GBMSM who participated in the survey and their mean age was 32.9 years (SD = 10.9). Almost a third (n = 115; 32.2%) had participated in group sex in the previous 3 months. GBMSM who sought sex partners at sex on premises venues (SOPVs) [aOR 5.83; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.23 to 10.53] had the highest odds of group sex participation after adjusting for other potential confounders. Compared with GBMSM not living with HIV and not taking PrEP, GBMSM taking PrEP had higher odds of group sex participation (aOR 2.09; 95% CI: 1.05 to 4.15), but GBMSM living with HIV did not (aOR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.23 to 3.68).Recent group sex participation was not associated with being diagnosed with any STI (chlamydia, syphilis, or gonorrhea) on the day in the adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

PrEP users and MSM attending SOPVs are more likely to participate in group sex. SOPV could be important venues for future public health campaigns.

Age pattern of sexual activities with the most recent partner among men who have sex with men in Melbourne, Australia: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Sexual behavioural studies among men who have sex with men (MSM) are predominantly focused on penile-anal intercourse. Other non-anal sexual activities are under-studied. This study aimed to examine the age pattern of a range of sexual activities among MSM with the most recent male sex partner.

METHODS

We conducted a survey among MSM attending the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre in 2017. This survey asked about nine different sexual activities with their most recent regular and casual partner. A Chi-square trend test was used to examine the age patterns of each sexual activity.

RESULTS

A total of 1596 men answered the survey and their median age was 30 (IQR 25-37) years. With casual partners, kissing was the most common activity (92.4%), followed by performing penile-oral sex (86.0%) and receiving penile-oral sex (83.9%). The least common activity was insertive rimming (38.1%). Young men were more likely to engage in kissing (p_trend<0.001), receptive rimming (p_trend=0.004) and receptive penile-anal sex (p_trend<0.001) but they were less likely to have insertive penile-anal sex compared with older MSM. With regular partners, the most common activity was kissing (97.4%), followed by touching penises (90.0%) and performing penile-oral sex (88.3%). Age was not associated with most types of sexual activity with regular partners except mutual masturbation and receptive penile-anal sex. Younger men were more likely to masturbate mutually (p_trend=0.028) and engage in receptive penile-anal sex (p_trend=0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

The pattern of sexual activities shows age-related differences with casual partners but less so with regular partners in MSM.