Affiliation:
1. Division of Medical Microbiology, Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland
2. Divisions of General Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Lyme disease is usually diagnosed and treated based on clinical manifestations. However, laboratory testing is useful for patients with confusing presentations and for validation of disease in clinical studies. Although cultivation of
Borrelia burgdorferi
is definitive, prior investigations have shown that no single test is optimal for Lyme disease diagnosis. We applied high-volume blood culture, skin biopsy culture, PCR, and serodiagnosis to a cohort of patients with suspected Lyme disease acquired in Maryland and southern Pennsylvania. The study was performed to confirm the relative utility of culture and to identify laboratory testing algorithms that will supplement clinical diagnosis. Overall, 30 of 86 patients (35%) were culture positive, whereas an additional 15 of 84 (18%) were seropositive only (51% total sero- and culture positive), and PCR on skin biopsy identified 4 additional patients who were neither culture nor seropositive. Among 49 laboratory test-positive patients, the highest sensitivity (100%) for diagnosis was obtained when culture, skin PCR, and serologic tests were used, although serologic testing with skin PCR was almost as sensitive (92%). Plasma PCR was infrequently positive and provided no additional diagnostic value. Although culture is definitive and has a relatively high sensitivity, the results required a mean of 3.5 weeks to recovery. The combination of acute-phase serology and skin PCR was 75% sensitive, offering a practical and relatively rapid alternative for confirming clinical impression. The full battery of tests could be useful for patients with confusing clinical signs or for providing strong laboratory support for clinical studies of Lyme disease.
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Reference16 articles.
1. Auwaerter, P. G., J. Aucott, and J. S. Dumler. 2004. Lyme borreliosis (Lyme disease): molecular and cellular pathobiology and prospects for prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Expert Rev. Mol. Med.2004:1-22.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1995. Recommendations for test performance and interpretation from the Second National Conference on Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.44:590-591.
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1997. Case definitions for infectious conditions under public health surveillance. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.46(RR10):1-55.
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2004. Lyme disease—United States, 2001-2002. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.53:365-368.
5. Dumler, J. S. 2001. Molecular diagnosis of Lyme disease: review and meta-analysis. Mol. Diagn.6:1-11.
Cited by
72 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献