There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Laboratory testing is helpful when evaluating patients with suspected Lyme disease (LD). A 2-tiered antibody testing approach is recommended, but single-tier and nonvalidated tests are also used. We conducted a survey of large commercial laboratories in the United States to assess laboratory practices. We used these data to estimate the cost of testing and number of infections among patients from whom specimens were submitted. Large commercial laboratories were asked to report the type and volume of testing conducted nationwide in 2008, as well as the percentage of positive tests for 4 LD-endemic states. The total direct cost of testing was calculated for each test type. These data and test-specific performance parameters available in published literature were used to estimate the number of infections among source patients. Seven participating laboratories performed approximately 3.4 million LD tests on approximately 2.4 million specimens nationwide at an estimated cost of $492 million. Two-tiered testing accounted for at least 62% of assays performed; alternative testing accounted for <3% of assays. The estimated frequency of infection among patients from whom specimens were submitted ranged from 10% to 18.5%. Applied to the total numbers of specimens, this yielded an estimated 240 000 to 444 000 infected source patients in 2008. LD testing is common and costly, with most testing in accordance with diagnostic recommendations. These results highlight the importance of considering clinical and exposure history when interpreting laboratory results for diagnostic and surveillance purposes. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2014. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.

Related collections

Most cited references 29

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Diagnosis of lyme borreliosis.

Michael Rosenfeld, Guiqing Wang, Gary Wormser … (2005)

A large amount of knowledge has been acquired since the original descriptions of Lyme borreliosis (LB) and of its causative agent, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto. The complexity of the organism and the variations in the clinical manifestations of LB caused by the different B. burgdorferi sensu lato species were not then anticipated. Considerable improvement has been achieved in detection of B. burgdorferi sensu lato by culture, particularly of blood specimens during early stages of disease. Culturing plasma and increasing the volume of material cultured have accomplished this. Further improvements might be obtained if molecular methods are used for detection of growth in culture and if culture methods are automated. Unfortunately, culture is insensitive in extracutaneous manifestations of LB. PCR and culture have high sensitivity on skin samples of patients with EM whose diagnosis is based mostly on clinical recognition of the lesion. PCR on material obtained from extracutaneous sites is in general of low sensitivity, with the exception of synovial fluid. PCR on synovial fluid has shown a sensitivity of up to >90% (when using four different primer sets) in patients with untreated or partially treated Lyme arthritis, making it a helpful confirmatory test in these patients. Currently, the best use of PCR is for confirmation of the clinical diagnosis of suspected Lyme arthritis in patients who are IgG immunoblot positive. PCR should not be used as the sole laboratory modality to support a clinical diagnosis of extracutaneous LB. PCR positivity in seronegative patients suspected of having late manifestations of LB most likely represents a false-positive result. Because of difficulties in direct methods of detection, laboratory tests currently in use are mainly those detecting antibodies to B. burgdorferi sensu lato. Tests used to detect antibodies to B. burgdorferi sensu lato have evolved from the initial formats as more knowledge on the immunodominant antigens has been collected. The recommendation for two-tier testing was an attempt to standardize testing and improve specificity in the United States. First-tier assays using whole-cell sonicates of B. burgdorferi sensu lato need to be standardized in terms of antigen composition and detection threshold of specific immunoglobulin classes. The search for improved serologic tests has stimulated the development of recombinant protein antigens and the synthesis of specific peptides from immunodominant antigens. The use of these materials alone or in combination as the source of antigen in a single-tier immunoassay may someday replace the currently recommended two-tier testing strategy. Evaluation of these assays is currently being done, and there is evidence that certain of these antigens may be broadly cross-reactive with the B. burgdorferi sensu lato species causing LB in Europe.

0 comments Cited 151 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Lyme Disease

Allen Steere (1989)

Within the last decade, Lyme borreliosis has emerged as a complex new infection whose distribution is worldwide. The disorder is caused by a recently recognized spirochete, B. burgdorferi, transmitted by ticks of the I. ricinus complex. Certain species of mice are critical in the life cycle of the spirochete, and deer appear to be crucial to the tick. Although the disorder's basic outlines are similar everywhere, there are regional variations in the causative spirochete, animal hosts, and clinical manifestations of the illness. In the United States, Lyme disease commonly begins in summer with a characteristic skin lesion, erythema migrans, accompanied by flu-like or meningitis-like symptoms. Weeks or months later, the patients may have neurologic or cardiac abnormalities, migratory musculoskeletal pain, or arthritis, and more than a year after onset, some patients have chronic joint, skin, or neurologic abnormalities. After the first several weeks of infection, almost all patients have a positive antibody response to the spirochete, and serologic determinations are currently the most practical laboratory aid in diagnosis. Treatment with appropriate antibiotics is usually curative, but longer courses of therapy are often needed later in the illness, and some patients may not respond.

0 comments Cited 133 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Western blotting in the serodiagnosis of Lyme disease.

F Dressler, J Whalen, B Reinhardt … (1993)

There are currently no accepted criteria for positive Western blots in Lyme disease. In a retrospective analysis of 225 case and control subjects, the best discriminatory ability of test criteria was obtained by requiring at least 2 of the 8 most common IgM bands in early disease (18, 21, 28, 37, 41, 45, 58, and 93 kDa) and by requiring at least 5 of the 10 most frequent IgG bands after the first weeks of infection (18, 21, 28, 30, 39, 41, 45, 58, 66, and 93 kDa). When these definitions were tested in a prospective study of all 237 patients seen in a diagnostic Lyme disease clinic during a 1-year period and in 74 patients with erythema migrans or summer flu-like illnesses, the IgM blot in early disease had a sensitivity of 32% and a specificity of 100%; the IgG blot after the first weeks of infection had a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 95%. Among patients with indeterminate IgG responses by ELISA, 6 of 9 patients with active Lyme disease had positive blots compared with 2 of 34 patients with other illnesses (P < .001). Thus, Western blotting can be used to increase the specificity of serologic testing in Lyme disease.