Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, Diakonessenhuis Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2024 Dec;43(12):2397-2406. doi: 10.1007/s10096-024-04956-y. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
Diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) relies on clinical symptoms and detection of Borrelia-specific antibodies. Guidelines recommend a two-tier testing (TTT) strategy for disseminated LB: serological screening with a sensitive enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and confirmation with a specific immunoblot. Searching for the most sensitive and specific approach, this retrospective study evaluated standard (STTT) and modified (MTTT) strategies using a well-defined study population.
Cases included patients with active Lyme neuroborreliosis (LNB; n = 29) or Lyme arthritis (LA; n = 17). Controls comprised patients treated for LNB (n = 36) or LA (n = 8), healthy individuals who were either untreated (n = 75) or treated for LB (n = 15) in the past, and patients with potentially cross-reactive diseases (n = 16). Sera were subjected to three EIAs and two immunoblots. Reactive screening results were confirmed by immunoblot (STTT) or EIA (MTTT). Solitary IgM results in the screening assay and effects of antibiotic treatment on isotype-specific seropositivity rates were also assessed.
Sensitivities of STTT strategies ranged from 90%-97% for LNB and were 100% for LA. MTTT strategies were 100% sensitive. Specificities ranged from 89%-95% for STTT and from 88%-93% for MTTT strategies. Differences between STTT and MTTT strategies were not statistically significant. Solitary IgM reactivity was common among controls. Antibiotic treatment significantly reduced IgM/IgG positivity for LNB patients; for LA patients, a decline was only observed for IgM.
In conclusion, MTTT strategies showed a slightly higher sensitivity and similar specificity compared to STTT strategies. Since EIAs are more time- and cost-efficient, MTTT strategies seem more favorable for clinical use. IgG testing enhances specificity with minimal sensitivity loss.
莱姆病(LB)的诊断依赖于临床症状和检测伯氏疏螺旋体特异性抗体。指南建议采用两阶段检测(TTT)策略来诊断播散性 LB:采用敏感酶免疫测定法(EIA)进行血清学筛查,并用特异性免疫印迹法进行确认。为了寻找最敏感和最特异的方法,本回顾性研究采用明确的研究人群评估了标准(STTT)和改良(MTTT)策略。
病例包括活动性莱姆神经 Borreliosis(LNB;n=29)或莱姆关节炎(LA;n=17)患者。对照组包括接受 LNB(n=36)或 LA(n=8)治疗的患者、未经治疗(n=75)或过去曾接受 LB 治疗(n=15)的健康个体以及可能存在交叉反应性疾病(n=16)的患者。血清样本进行了三种 EIA 和两种免疫印迹检测。反应性筛查结果采用免疫印迹(STTT)或 EIA(MTTT)确认。还评估了单独 IgM 结果在筛查试验中的作用以及抗生素治疗对各型特异性血清阳性率的影响。
STTT 策略对 LNB 的敏感性为 90%-97%,对 LA 的敏感性为 100%。MTTT 策略的敏感性为 100%。STTT 策略的特异性为 89%-95%,MTTT 策略的特异性为 88%-93%。STTT 策略和 MTTT 策略之间的差异无统计学意义。在对照组中,单独的 IgM 反应性很常见。抗生素治疗显著降低了 LNB 患者的 IgM/IgG 阳性率;对于 LA 患者,仅观察到 IgM 下降。
总之,与 STTT 策略相比,MTTT 策略的敏感性略高,特异性相似。由于 EIA 更省时、更经济,因此 MTTT 策略似乎更适合临床应用。IgG 检测可在最小的敏感性损失下提高特异性。