9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Tick killing in situ before removal to prevent allergic and anaphylactic reactions in humans: a cross-sectional study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          Background

          Tick anaphylaxis is a potentially fatal outcome of improper tick removal and management.

          Objective

          To investigate whether killing ticks in-situ with ether-containing sprays or permethrin cream, before careful removal by the mouthparts could reduce this risk.

          Methods

          This was a prospective study at Mona Vale Hospital Emergency Department (ED) in Sydney, New South Wales, over a 6-month period during the peak tick season of 2016. Tick removal methods, allergic/anaphylactic reactions were recorded for patients presenting with ticks in situ or having already removed the ticks themselves. Primary endpoint was allergic/anaphylactic reaction after tick killing/removal.

          Results

          One hundred twenty-one patients met study inclusion criteria. Sixty-one patients (28 known tick-hypersensitive) had ticks killed with Wart-Off Freeze or Lyclear Scabies Cream (5% w/w permethrin) before removal with fine-tipped forceps or Tick Twister. Three patients (2 known tick-hypersensitive) had allergic reactions (5%), none anaphylactic. The 2 known hypersensitive patients suffered reactions during the killing process and the third patient had a particularly embedded tick meaning it could not be removed solely by mouthparts. Fifty patients presented to the ED posttick removal by various methods, none using either fine-tipped forceps or Tick Twister, of which 43 (86%) experienced allergic reactions – 2 anaphylactic. Five patients suffered allergic reactions before presentation despite no attempt at kill or removal, but ticks had likely been disturbed by some other method. Five patients had live ticks removed in ED – 3 refused killing and had no reaction despite 1 having known hypersensitivity; 2 had ticks on eyelids contraindicating killing, 1 with known hypersensitivity but both had allergic reactions post removal.

          Conclusion

          Results support killing ticks in-situ before careful removal by mouthparts to reduce allergic/anaphylactic reactions although further research is still required.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Overview: Ticks as vectors of pathogens that cause disease in humans and animals.

          Ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) transmit a wide variety of pathogens to vertebrates including viruses, bacteria, protozoa and helminthes. Tick-borne pathogens are believed to be responsible for more than 100,000 cases of illness in humans throughout the world. Ticks are considered to be second worldwide to mosquitoes as vectors of human diseases, but they are the most important vectors of disease-causing pathogens in domestic and wild animals. Infection and development of pathogens in both tick and vertebrate hosts are mediated by molecular mechanisms at the tick-pathogen interface. These mechanisms, involving traits of both ticks and pathogens, include the evolution of common and species-specific characteristics. The molecular characterization of the tick-pathogen interface is rapidly advancing and providing new avenues for the development of novel control strategies for both tick infestations and their associated pathogens.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Anaphylaxis--a practice parameter update 2015.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pathogen transmission in relation to duration of attachment by Ixodes scapularis ticks.

              Lars Eisen (2018)
              The blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis, is the primary vector to humans in the eastern United States of the deer tick virus lineage of Powassan virus (Powassan virus disease); the protozoan parasite Babesia microti (babesiosis); and multiple bacterial disease agents including Anaplasma phagocytophilum (anaplasmosis), Borrelia burgdorferi and Borrelia mayonii (Lyme disease), Borrelia miyamotoi (relapsing fever-like illness, named Borrelia miyamotoi disease), and Ehrlichia muris eauclairensis (a minor causative agent of ehrlichiosis). With the notable exception of Powassan virus, which can be transmitted within minutes after attachment by an infected tick, there is no doubt that the risk of transmission of other I. scapularis-borne pathogens, including Lyme disease spirochetes, increases with the length of time (number of days) infected ticks are allowed to remain attached. This review summarizes data from experimental transmission studies to reinforce the important disease-prevention message that regular (at least daily) tick checks and prompt tick removal has strong potential to reduce the risk of transmission of I. scapularis-borne bacterial and parasitic pathogens from infected attached ticks. The most likely scenario for human exposure to an I. scapularis-borne pathogen is the bite by a single infected tick. However, recent reviews have failed to make a clear distinction between data based on transmission studies where experimental hosts were fed upon by a single versus multiple infected ticks. A summary of data from experimental studies on transmission of Lyme disease spirochetes (Bo. burgdorferi and Bo. mayonii) by I. scapularis nymphs indicates that the probability of transmission resulting in host infection, at time points from 24 to 72 h after nymphal attachment, is higher when multiple infected ticks feed together as compared to feeding by a single infected tick. In the specific context of risk for human infection, the most relevant experimental studies therefore are those where the probability of pathogen transmission at a given point in time after attachment was determined using a single infected tick. The minimum duration of attachment by single infected I. scapularis nymphs required for transmission to result in host infection is poorly defined for most pathogens, but experimental studies have shown that Powassan virus can be transmitted within 15 min of tick attachment and both A. phagocytophilum and Bo. miyamotoi within the first 24 h of attachment. There is no experimental evidence for transmission of Lyme disease spirochetes by single infected I. scapularis nymphs to result in host infection when ticks are attached for only 24 h (despite exposure of nearly 90 experimental rodent hosts across multiple studies) but the probability of transmission resulting in host infection appears to increase to approximately 10% by 48 h and reach 70% by 72 h for Bo. burgdorferi. Caveats to the results from experimental transmission studies, including specific circumstances (such as re-attachment of previously partially fed infected ticks) that may lead to more rapid transmission are discussed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Asia Pac Allergy
                Asia Pac Allergy
                APA
                Asia Pacific Allergy
                Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology
                2233-8276
                2233-8268
                April 2019
                18 April 2019
                : 9
                : 2
                : e15
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Emergency Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
                [2 ]Department of Emergency Medicine, Northern Beaches Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
                [3 ]Northern Clinical School, Sydney Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Australia.
                [4 ]Department of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
                Author notes
                Correspondence to Benjamin William Phillips Taylor. Emergency Department, St Vincent's Hospital, 7 Don Street, Newtown, NSW 2042, Australia. Tel: +610432666187, Dr.Benjamin.Taylor@ 123456gmail.com
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2029-6473
                Article
                2019090206
                10.5415/apallergy.2019.9.e15
                6494660
                5fa613de-9a9e-4919-bb6d-aed65eb8dfdf
                Copyright © 2019. Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 02 February 2019
                : 17 April 2019
                Categories
                Original Article

                Immunology
                tick bites,ticks,anaphylaxis,humans,tick toxicoses
                Immunology
                tick bites, ticks, anaphylaxis, humans, tick toxicoses

                Comments

                Comment on this article