U.S. Preventive Services Task Force banner
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

You Are Here: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force > Topic Index > Screening: Genital Herpes > Recommendation Statement


Screening for Genital Herpes

Recommendation Statement


This statement summarizes the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations on screening for genital herpes and the supporting scientific evidence, and updates the 1996 recommendations contained in the Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, second edition.1


Summary of Recommendations

  • The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends against routine serological screening for herpes simplex virus (HSV) in asymptomatic pregnant women at any time during pregnancy to prevent neonatal HSV infection.

    Rating: D Recommendation.

    Rationale: The USPSTF found fair evidence that screening asymptomatic pregnant women using serological screening tests for HSV antibody does not reduce transmission of HSV to newborn infants. Women who develop primary HSV infection during pregnancy have the highest risk for transmitting HSV infection to their infants. Because these women are initially seronegative, serological screening tests for HSV (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA], immunoblot, and western blot assay [WBA]) do not accurately detect those at highest risk. There is no evidence that treating seronegative women decreases risk for neonatal infection. There is limited evidence that the use of antiviral therapy in women with a history of recurrent HSV, or performance of cesarean section in women with active HSV lesions at the time of delivery, decreases neonatal herpes infection. There also is limited evidence of the safety of antiviral therapy in pregnant women and neonates.

    The potential harms of screening include false-positive test results, labeling, and anxiety, as well as false negative tests and false reassurance, although these potential harms are not well studied. The USPSTF determined there are no benefits associated with screening, and therefore the potential harms outweigh the benefits.

  • The USPSTF recommends against routine serological screening for HSV in asymptomatic adolescents and adults.

    Rating: D Recommendation.

    Rationale: The USPSTF found no evidence that screening asymptomatic adolescents and adults with serological tests for HSV antibody improves health outcomes or symptoms or reduces transmission of disease. There is good evidence that serological screening tests can accurately identify those persons who have been exposed to HSV. There is good evidence that antiviral therapy improves health outcomes in symptomatic persons (e.g., those with multiple recurrences); however, there is no evidence that the use of antiviral therapy improves health outcomes in those with asymptomatic infection. The potential harms of screening include false-positive test results, labeling, and anxiety, although there is limited evidence of any potential harms of either screening or treatment. The USPSTF determined the benefits of screening are minimal, at best, and the potential harms outweigh the potential benefits.


Contents

Clinical Considerations
Discussion
Recommendations of Other Groups
References
Members of the Task Force
Contact the Task Force
Available Products
Copyright and Electronic Dissemination

Task Force Ratings
Strength of Recommendations and Quality of Evidence

Clinical Considerations

Return to Contents

Discussion

Genital herpes simplex (commonly caused by HSV-2, occasionally by HSV-1) is the most prevalent STI in the United States.3 Seroprevalence surveys show that 1 in 5 people aged 12 years and older in the United States has been infected with HSV-2, and the rate is even higher among adults and women.3 An estimated 1.6 million new HSV-2 infections occur in the United States annually.4

Symptoms vary based on phase of infection:

HSV in pregnant women can be vertically transmitted to the infant, primarily at the time of delivery. Primary infection during pregnancy, although less prevalent than recurrent infection, is associated with a much higher transmission rate (33% vs 3% transmission rates in primary and recurrent infection, respectively).5 Neonatal HSV disease is diagnosed in approximately 1 of every 3,000 deliveries in the United States, resulting in an estimated 1,500 cases annually.6 Infants infected with HSV may be born prematurely and with low birth weight; symptoms vary from mild localized disease to severe disseminated infection. Encephalitis and disseminated disease secondary to neonatal HSV infection are associated with long-term morbidity and mortality.7 Intrauterine infections (congenital herpes) are very rare (1/100,000) although they result in serious sequelae including hydrocephalus, microcephaly, and chorioretinitis.

The USPSTF reviewed the evidence from 1996-2002 and found no direct evidence that screening asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant women, for genital HSV reduces symptomatic recurrences or transmission of disease.

Methods for HSV detection include viral culture, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and antibody-based tests including the WBA and type-specific glycoprotein G serological tests. Viral culture has a sensitivity of 50 percent and a specificity of nearly 100 percent. PCR has a sensitivity of 80 percent to 90 percent for specimens obtained from lesions. Serological tests are used to detect previous infection with herpes in asymptomatic patients, or to diagnose infection in a symptomatic patient when culture is not feasible or the clinical syndrome is unclear. The WBA is considered the gold standard, with a sensitivity and specificity of greater than 99 percent.8,9 Currently, 2 type-specific glycoprotein G serological tests, the ELISA and immunoblot tests, are commercially available in the United States; they have a sensitivity and specificity comparable to the WBA.10

The USPSTF examined the evidence for the efficacy of antiviral therapy in reducing symptomatic recurrences and transmission in adolescents and adults. Three good-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one fair-quality RCT examined the effectiveness of antiviral agents in the suppression of HSV recurrences.11-14 These studies showed that in those persons with 6 or more recurrences annually, those taking antiviral therapy had a significantly longer delay in the time to first recurrence compared with those receiving placebo. One good-quality RCT of women with a history of recurrent HSV showed that the relative risk for subclinical viral shedding was lower in women who received acyclovir compared with women who received placebo.15

The USPSTF examined the evidence for the efficacy of antiviral therapy and condom use in reducing HSV-2 transmission in adolescents and adults. A good-quality, randomized, multi-center, placebo-controlled trial showed that once-daily valacyclovir reduced sexual transmission of genital HSV-2 in monogamous heterosexual couples who were discordant for HSV-2 infection.16 In this study, fewer of the susceptible partners developed clinical symptoms, and fewer of the source partners had evidence of viral shedding in the treatment group compared with the placebo group. One prospective cohort study suggested that male condom use in 25 percent of episodes of sexual intercourse was associated with a lower risk for HSV-2 acquisition among women but not among men; however, condom use was low throughout the study, with only 61 percent of couples reporting ever using condoms and only 8 percent reporting condom use for each sexual act, despite counseling at each clinic followup visit.17 In a second prospective cohort study, use of condoms for more than 65 percent of episodes of sexual intercourse offered significant and comparable protection against HSV-2 acquisition for both men and women.18

The USPSTF examined the evidence for interventions in pregnant women to reduce HSV recurrence at the time of delivery, including antiviral use in late pregnancy and cesarean section delivery. One fair-quality RCT of women with recurrent genital HSV infection evaluated the use of suppressive acyclovir after 36 weeks' gestation and found that 6 percent of patients treated with acyclovir had clinical HSV at delivery compared with 14 percent of patients treated with placebo.19 No patients in the acyclovir group had positive HSV cultures, compared with 6 percent of placebo-treated patients. Three poor-quality studies examined reduction of neonatal infection as an outcome of antiviral therapy in pregnant women with a history of HSV.20-22 One poor-quality study examined the use of cesarean section to reduce neonatal infection.23

Potential harms of screening for HSV-2 include labeling, anxiety, and disrupting partner relationships. A qualitative assessment of the psychosocial impact of a serological diagnosis of HSV-2 concluded that patients may experience strong psychological responses to their diagnoses.24 False-positive test results may lead to needless work-up and anxiety. Negative test results may potentially provide false reassurance to continue high-risk sexual behavior. Potential harms of antiviral treatment may include drug hypersensitivity and renal impairment; however, antiviral treatments are generally well tolerated with mild harms.11-13 There is limited evidence on the safety of antiviral treatments during pregnancy.25,26

A cost analysis of oral acyclovir prophylaxis in late pregnancy was compared with the current standard of cesarean delivery for genital HSV lesions. This analysis demonstrated that prophylactic acyclovir and followup of infants exposed to HSV during a non-cesarean delivery was least expensive ($400,000 per case of neonatal infection prevented), while the use of cesarean section alone for women with active lesions at the time of delivery was most expensive ($1.3 million per case of neonatal infection prevented).27 Another study found that screening at-risk pregnant women and suppressive therapy in their seropositive partners were more cost-effective interventions (at a cost of $363,000 per case of neonatal infection prevented) compared with no management or cesarean section delivery for women with lesions.28

Further research is needed to define the clinical significance and natural history of asymptomatic persons who have seropositive test results, to identify effective strategies to decrease HSV transmission, and to examine the benefits of antiviral suppression and cesarean section delivery for pregnant women in reducing neonatal infection. Previous literature examining various vaccines under study have reported poor efficacy29,30 and vaccine research is ongoing.

Return to Contents

Recommendations of Other Groups

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines are available in print form.31 ACOG recommends that all women and their partners be asked about a history of HSV infection; women with a history of genital HSV infection should be questioned about recent symptoms and should undergo careful examination of the perineum before delivery. ACOG recommends cesarean delivery for all women with active primary and recurrent lesions at the time of delivery. ACOG does not recommend screening nonpregnant women for HSV; ACOG makes treatment recommendations, including methods to reduce the risk for transmission among discordant couples.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention HSV treatment recommendations can be accessed at: http://www.cdc.gov/STD/treatment/2-2002TG.htm.32

Return to Contents

References

1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; 1996.

2. Glass N, Nelson HD, Huffman L. Screening for genital herpes simplex: brief update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; March 2005. Available at: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

3. Fleming DT, McQuillan GM, Johnson RE, et al. Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2 in the United States, 1976 to 1994. N Engl J Med 1997;337(16):1105-11.

4. Armstrong GL, Schillinger J, Markowitz L, et al. Incidence of herpes simplex virus type 2 infection in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 2001;153(9):912-20.

5. Brown ZA. HSV-2 specific serology should be offered routinely to antenatal patients. Rev Med Virol 2000;10(3):141-4.

6. Kimberlin DW, Lin CY, Jacobs RF, et al; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Collaborative Antiviral Study Group. Natural history of neonatal herpes simplex virus infections in the acyclovir era. Pediatrics 2001;108(2):223-9.

7. Rudnick CM, GS Hoekzema. Neonatal herpes simplex virus infections. Am Fam Physician 2002;65(6):1138-42.

8. Ashley R. Type specific antibodies to HSV1 and HSV2: review of methodology. Herpes 1998;5:33-8.

9. Slomka MJ, Ashley RL, Cowan FM, Cross A, Brown DW. Monoclonal antibody blocking tests for the detection of HSV-1- and HSV-2-specific humoral responses: comparison with western blot assay. J Virol Methods 1995;55:27-35.

10. Ashley RL. Sorting out the new HSV type specific antibody tests. Sex Transm Infect 2001;77(4):232-7.

11. Diaz-Mitoma F, Sibbald RG, Shafran SD, Boon R, Saltzman RL. Oral famciclovir for the suppression of recurrent genital herpes: a randomized controlled trial. Collaborative Famciclovir Genital Herpes Research Group. JAMA 1998;280:887-92.

12. Mertz GJ, Loveless MO, Levin MJ, et al. Oral famciclovir for suppression of recurrent genital herpes simplex virus infection in women. A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Collaborative Famciclovir Genital Herpes Research Group. Arch Intern Med 1997;157(3):343-9.

13. Reitano M, Tyring S, Lang W, et al. Valaciclovir for the suppression of recurrent genital herpes simplex virus infection: a large-scale dose range-finding study. International Valaciclovir HSV Study Group. J Infect Dis 1998;178(3):603-10.

14. Patel R, Bodsworth NJ, Woolley P, et al. Valaciclovir for the suppression of recurrent genital HSV infection: a placebo controlled study of once daily therapy. International Valaciclovir Study Group. Genitourin Med 1997;73(2):105-9.

15. Wald A, Zeh J, Barnum G, Davis LG, Corey L. Suppression of subclinical shedding for herpes simplex virus type 2 with acyclovir. Ann Intern Med 1996;124:8-15.

16. Corey L, Wald A, Patel R, et al. Once-daily valacyclovir to reduce the risk of transmission of genital herpes. N Engl J Med 2004;350(1):11-20.

17. Wald A, Langenberg AG, Link K, et al. Effect of condoms on reducing the transmission of herpes simplex virus type 2 from men to women. JAMA 2001;285(24):3100-6.

18. Wald A, Langenberg A, Kexel E, Izu A, Ashley R, Corey L. Condoms protect men and women against HSV-2 acquisition. 2002 National STD Prevention Conference. March 4-7, 2002. San Diego, CA.

19. Scott LL, Hollier LM, McIntire D, Sanchez PJ, Jackson GL, Wendel GD Jr. Acyclovir suppression to prevent recurrent genital herpes at delivery. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 2002;10(2):71-7.

20. Brocklehurst P, Kinghorn G, Carney O, et al. A randomised placebo-controlled trial of suppressive acyclovir in late pregnancy in women with recurrent genital herpes infection. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105(3):275-80.

21. Scott LL, Sanchez PJ, Jackson GL, Zeray F, Wendel GD Jr. Acyclovir suppression to prevent cesarean delivery after first-episode genital herpes. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87(1):69-73.

22. Braig S, Luton D, Sibony O, et al. Acyclovir prophylaxis in late pregnancy prevents recurrent genital herpes and viral shedding. Euro J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001;96(1):55-8.

23. Brown ZA, Wald A, Morrow RA, Selke S, Zeh J, Corey L. Effect of serologic status and cesarean delivery on transmission rates of herpes simplex virus from mother to infant [comment]. JAMA 2003;289(2):203-9.

24. Melville J, Sniffen S, Crosby R, et al. Psychosocial impact of serological diagnosis of herpes simplex virus type 2: a qualitative assessment. Sex Transm Infect 2003;79(4):280-5.

25. Kimberlin DF, Weller S, Whitley RJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of oral valacyclovir and acyclovir in late pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179(4):846-51.

26. Acyclovir and Valacyclovir in Pregnancy Registry final report. April 1999. Available at: http://pregnancyregistry.gsk.com/acyclovir.html. Accessed January 18, 2005.

27. Randolph AG, Hartshorn RM, Washington AE. Acyclovir prophylaxis in late pregnancy to prevent neonatal herpes: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1996;88(4 Pt 1):603-10.

28. Barnabas RV, Carabin H, Garnett GP. The potential role of suppressive therapy for sex partners in the prevention of neonatal herpes: a health economic analysis. Sex Transm Infect 2002;78(6):425-9.

29. Stanberry LR, Spruance SL, Cunningham AL, et al. Glycoprotein-D-Adjuvant vaccine to prevent genital herpes. N Engl J Med 2002;347(21):1652-61.

30. Corey L, Langenberg AG, Ashley R, et al. Recombinant glycoprotein vaccine for the prevention of genital HSV-2 infection: two randomized controlled trials. Chiron HSV Vaccine Study Group. JAMA 1999;282(4):331-40.

31. American Academy of Pediatrics and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Guidelines for Perinatal Care, 5th ed. Elk Grove Village, IL: AAP; Washington, DC: ACOG; 2002.

32. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines 2002. MMWR—Recommendations and Reports 2002;51(RR-6).

Return to Contents

Members of the Task Force

Members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force* are Ned Calonge, M.D., M.P.H., Chair, USPSTF (Chief Medical Officer and State Epidemiologist, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Denver, CO); Janet D. Allan, Ph.D., R.N., C.S., Vice-chair, USPSTF (Dean, School of Nursing, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD); Alfred O. Berg, M.D., M.P.H. (Professor and Chair, Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA); Paul S. Frame, M.D. (Family Physician, Tri-County Family Medicine, Cohocton, NY, and Clinical Professor of Family Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY); Leon Gordis, M.D., M.P.H., Dr.P.H. (Professor, Epidemiology Department, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD); Kimberly D. Gregory, M.D., M.P.H. (Director, Women's Health Services Research and Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA); Russell Harris, M.D., M.P.H. (Professor of Medicine, Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC); Mark S. Johnson, M.D., M.P.H. (Professor and Chair, Department of Family Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ); Jonathan D. Klein, M.D., M.P.H. (Associate Professor, Department of Pediatrics, University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, NY); Carol Loveland-Cherry, Ph.D., R.N. (Executive Associate Dean, Office of Academic Affairs, University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, MI); Virginia A. Moyer, M.D., M.P.H. (Professor, Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX); Judith K. Ockene, Ph.D. (Professor of Medicine and Chief of Division of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA); Diana B. Petitti, M.D., M.P.H. (Senior Scientific Advisor for Health Policy and Medicine, Regional Administration, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena CA); Albert L. Siu, M.D., M.S.P.H. (Professor and Chairman, Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Adult Development, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY); Steven M. Teutsch, M.D., M.P.H. (Executive Director, Outcomes Research and Management, Merck & Company, Inc., West Point, PA); and Barbara P. Yawn, M.D., M.Sc. (Director of Research, Olmstead Research Center, Rochester, MN).

* Members of the Task Force at the time this recommendation was finalized. For a list of current Task Force members, go to http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/about.htm.

Return to Contents

Contact the Task Force

Address correspondence to: Ned Calonge, M.D., M.P.H., Chair, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, c/o Program Director, 540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850.

Return to Contents

Available Products

The complete information on which this statement is based, including evidence tables and references, is included in the brief update2 on this topic, available through the USPSTF Web site (http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org).

Recommendations made by the USPSTF are independent of the U.S. Government. They should not be construed as an official position of AHRQ or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Return to Contents

Copyright and Electronic Dissemination

This document is in the public domain within the United States. Requests for linking or to incorporate content in electronic resources should be sent via the USPSTF contact form.

Return to Contents

AHRQ Publication No. 05-0573-A
Current as of March 2005


Internet Citation:

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for Genital Herpes: Recommendation Statement. AHRQ Publication No. 05-0573-A, March 2005. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf05/herpes/herpesrs.htm


 


USPSTF Program Office   540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850