LYME'S DISEASE, AN IMPORTED ZOONOSIS. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF PRESENCE IN ARGENTINA

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Rita Armitano , Gisela Martinez , Pablo Borras , Sofia Echazarreta , Tomas Orduna , Monica Prieto
{"title":"LYME'S DISEASE, AN IMPORTED ZOONOSIS. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF PRESENCE IN ARGENTINA","authors":"Rita Armitano ,&nbsp;Gisela Martinez ,&nbsp;Pablo Borras ,&nbsp;Sofia Echazarreta ,&nbsp;Tomas Orduna ,&nbsp;Monica Prieto","doi":"10.1016/j.bjid.2024.104421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Lyme disease (LD) is caused by bacteria of the Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex and transmitted by the bite of ticks of the Ixodes ricinus complex. To date, no autochthonous cases have been reported in Argentina. Its diagnosis involves serological tests included in a two-step algorithm. The study proposes to report the results of laboratory tests, describe the clinical-epidemiological characteristics of consultations received due to suspected LD, and critically evaluate the scientific evidence on alleged autochthonous cases of Lyme in Argentina.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>From 09/2014-05/2022, a study was carried out that included 53 individuals who consulted due to suspected LD at a reference laboratory. Serum samples were obtained and referred to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for determination of IgM and IgG antibodies. The samples met one or both inclusion criteria: -Travel to an area where the transmitting vector circulates; -Positive diagnostic tests reported by national and international laboratories.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>According to the data collected from the epidemiological form, it was evident: 36% of the patients presented non-specific neurological symptoms and 64% reported rheumatological symptoms; 57% of the patients did not report traveling to the area of circulation of the transmitting vector; 46% reported having suffered multiple bites. According to the aforementioned selection criteria, 43% (n = 23) of the patients met both criteria, which would suggest 23 possible imported cases of LD. The remaining 57% only showed positive results in at least one diagnostic technique for EL, which represented 30 “autochthonous” cases. Only 5 cases (9%), with positive results issued by national and international laboratories, were confirmed as positive by the CDC. These individuals had an epidemiological history of traveling to the tick vector circulation area. The remainder of the cases were reported as negative by the CDC and were ruled out as possible indigenous Lyme cases. The comparison of the results sent by private laboratories and those obtained by the CDC showed 91% (n = 48) false positives.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The diagnosis of LD should only be considered based on the presence of typical symptoms of infection in patients with a history of exposure to the vector. Always use FDA-approved assays and recommended interpretation criteria.</div></div><div><h3>Keywords</h3><div>Argentina, Lyme, Diagnostico.</div></div><div><h3>Conflicts of interest</h3><div>There was no conflicts of interest.</div></div><div><h3>Ethics and financing</h3><div>Declarations of interest: None.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56327,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":"28 ","pages":"Article 104421"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1413867024007049","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Lyme disease (LD) is caused by bacteria of the Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex and transmitted by the bite of ticks of the Ixodes ricinus complex. To date, no autochthonous cases have been reported in Argentina. Its diagnosis involves serological tests included in a two-step algorithm. The study proposes to report the results of laboratory tests, describe the clinical-epidemiological characteristics of consultations received due to suspected LD, and critically evaluate the scientific evidence on alleged autochthonous cases of Lyme in Argentina.

Materials and methods

From 09/2014-05/2022, a study was carried out that included 53 individuals who consulted due to suspected LD at a reference laboratory. Serum samples were obtained and referred to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for determination of IgM and IgG antibodies. The samples met one or both inclusion criteria: -Travel to an area where the transmitting vector circulates; -Positive diagnostic tests reported by national and international laboratories.

Results

According to the data collected from the epidemiological form, it was evident: 36% of the patients presented non-specific neurological symptoms and 64% reported rheumatological symptoms; 57% of the patients did not report traveling to the area of circulation of the transmitting vector; 46% reported having suffered multiple bites. According to the aforementioned selection criteria, 43% (n = 23) of the patients met both criteria, which would suggest 23 possible imported cases of LD. The remaining 57% only showed positive results in at least one diagnostic technique for EL, which represented 30 “autochthonous” cases. Only 5 cases (9%), with positive results issued by national and international laboratories, were confirmed as positive by the CDC. These individuals had an epidemiological history of traveling to the tick vector circulation area. The remainder of the cases were reported as negative by the CDC and were ruled out as possible indigenous Lyme cases. The comparison of the results sent by private laboratories and those obtained by the CDC showed 91% (n = 48) false positives.

Conclusions

The diagnosis of LD should only be considered based on the presence of typical symptoms of infection in patients with a history of exposure to the vector. Always use FDA-approved assays and recommended interpretation criteria.

Keywords

Argentina, Lyme, Diagnostico.

Conflicts of interest

There was no conflicts of interest.

Ethics and financing

Declarations of interest: None.
莱姆病,一种外来的人畜共患疾病。对阿根廷存在的批判性分析
导言莱姆病(LD)是由博氏杆菌(Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato)引起的,通过蓖麻弓形虫(Ixodes ricinus)的蜱虫叮咬传播。迄今为止,阿根廷尚未报告过本地病例。其诊断涉及血清学检测,包括两步算法。本研究旨在报告实验室检测结果,描述因疑似莱姆病而就诊的患者的临床流行病学特征,并对阿根廷莱姆病疑似自发病例的科学证据进行批判性评估。材料与方法从2014年9月至2022年5月,我们开展了一项研究,其中包括53名因疑似莱姆病而到参考实验室就诊的患者。研究人员采集了血清样本,并将其转至疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)进行IgM和IgG抗体测定。样本符合一个或两个纳入标准:-前往传播媒介流行的地区; -国内和国际实验室报告的诊断测试呈阳性:36%的患者出现非特异性神经症状,64%的患者出现风湿症状;57%的患者未报告曾前往传播媒介的流行地区;46%的患者报告曾多次被叮咬。根据上述选择标准,43%(n = 23)的患者符合这两项标准,这表明可能有 23 例输入性退伍军人症病例。其余57%的患者只在至少一种EL诊断技术中显示出阳性结果,这代表了30个 "本地 "病例。只有 5 个病例(9%)在国家和国际实验室检测结果呈阳性的情况下,被疾病预防控制中心确诊为阳性。这些人都有到蜱虫病媒流行区旅行的流行病学史。疾病预防控制中心报告其余病例为阴性,并排除了可能是本地莱姆病例的可能性。私人实验室发送的结果与疾病预防控制中心获得的结果进行比较后发现,91%(n = 48)的结果为假阳性。一定要使用美国食品及药物管理局批准的检测方法和推荐的解释标准。关键词阿根廷、莱姆、诊断利益冲突无利益冲突:无。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
925
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: The Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases is the official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI). It aims to publish relevant articles in the broadest sense on all aspects of microbiology, infectious diseases and immune response to infectious agents. The BJID is a bimonthly publication and one of the most influential journals in its field in Brazil and Latin America with a high impact factor, since its inception it has garnered a growing share of the publishing market.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信