| Literature DB >> 24386087 |
Franc Strle1, Lara Lusa2, Eva Ružić-Sabljić3, Vera Maraspin1, Stanka Lotrič Furlan1, Jože Cimperman1, Katarina Ogrinc1, Tereza Rojko1, Jerneja Videčnik Zorman1, Daša Stupica1.
Abstract
Clinical characteristics associated with isolation of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato from skin have not been fully evaluated. To gain insight into predictors for a positive EM skin culture, we compared basic demographic, epidemiologic, and clinical data in 608 culture-proven and 501 culture-negative adult patients with solitary EM. A positive Borrelia spp. skin culture was associated with older age, a time interval of >2 days between tick bite and onset of the skin lesion, EM ≥ 5 cm in diameter, and location of the lesion on the extremities, whereas several other characteristics used as clinical case definition criteria for the diagnosis of EM (such as tick bite at the site of later EM, information on expansion of the skin lesion, central clearing) were not. A patient with a 15-cm EM lesion had almost 3-fold greater odds for a positive skin culture than patients with a 5-cm lesion. Patients with a free time interval between the tick bite and onset of EM had the same probability of a positive skin culture as those who did not recall a tick bite (OR=1.02); however, the two groups had >3-fold greater odds for EM positivity than patients who reported a tick bite with no interval between the bite and onset of the lesion. In conclusion, several yet not all clinical characteristics used in EM case definitions were associated with positive Borrelia spp. skin culture. The findings are limited to European patients with solitary EM caused predominantly by B. afzelii but may not be valid for other situations.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24386087 PMCID: PMC3873257 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082132
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Main characteristics required for the diagnosis of erythema migrans skin lesions according to differing case definitions.
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CDC [ | Stanek et al. [ | Strle et al. [ | Brouqui et al. [ | Stanek et al. [ | |
| Expansion | + | + | + | + | + |
| Central clearing | + (often) | + (often) | + (often) | + (often) | – |
| Diameter ≥5 cm | + | + (most cases) | + | - | + |
| Additional systemic symptoms | + (most patients) | + (may be present) | – | – | – |
| Tick bite | – | + (risk of exposure to ticks) | +a | +b | +c |
| Delay in appearancec | – | – | +a | – | +a |
| Delay in appearancec >2 days | – | – | – | – | +a |
+, parameter required; –, parameter not required.
a Criterion required only for lesions with the largest diameter <5 cm.
b Minor criterion.
c Delay in appearance after a tick bite.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Characteristics of patients with culture-positive and culture-negative erythema migrans.
|
|
|
| Unadjusted* | Adjusted for size of EM** | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Age (years) | 52 (40–60) | 50 (36–59) |
| 0.03 |
| 0.03 |
| Male sex | 275 (45.2%) | 221 (44.1%) | 1.05 | 0.71 | 0.99 | 0.94 |
| Tick bite | 333 (54.6%) | 287 (57.3%) | 0.90 | 0.40 | 0.97 | 0.85 |
| Days from tick bite to onset of EMa | 17 (10–29) | 14 (7–27) | 1.00 | 0.51 | 1.00 | 0.68 |
| >2 days from tick bite to onset of EMa | 296 (94.6%) | 235 (86.4%) |
| <0.001 |
| <0.001 |
| Duration of EM (days)b | 9 (4–30) | 10 (4–23) |
| <0.001 |
| <0.001 |
| Central clearing of EMc | 346 (57.0%) | 272 (54.3%) | 1.12 | 0.37 | 0.98 | 0.86 |
| Largest diameter of EM (cm)d,γ | 14 (10–21) | 12 (8–23) | <0.001 | -- | -- | |
| 10 vs. 5 cm |
| |||||
| 15 vs. 5 cm |
| |||||
| 20 vs. 5 cm |
| |||||
| 30 vs. 5 cm |
| |||||
| 40 vs. 5 cm |
| |||||
| Largest diameter of EM ≥5 cmd | 597 (98.8%) | 484 (96.6%) |
| 0.02 | -- | -- |
| Expansion of skin lesion (reported by patients)e | 366 (63.0%) | 287 (58.6%) | 1.20 | 0.14 | 1.12 | 0.40 |
| Ratio of EM diametersf | 1.53 (1.22–2) | 1.46 (1.19–1.89) | 1.06 | 0.38 | 1.04 | 0.54 |
| EM on leg or arm | 509 (84.0%) | 382 (76.2%) |
| 0.001 |
| 0.003 |
| Presence of non-specific symptomsc,g | 176 (29.0%) | 147 (29.3%) | 0.98 | 0.90 | 1.00 | 0.99 |
| Presence of symptoms at EM siteg | 287 (47.2%) | 246 (49.1%) | 0.93 | 0.53 | 0.93 | 0.55 |
| Seasonal occurrenceh,γ | 0.28 | 0.41 | ||||
| July vs. April | 1.25 | 1.25 | ||||
| July vs. October | 0.98 | 0.97 | ||||
| July vs. January | 1.47 | 1.42 | ||||
Data are median (interquartile range) or number (%); EM, erythema migrans; OR, odds ratio. OR and P values were obtained using *univariate logistic regression or **multiple logistic regression, adjusting the analysis for the size of EM (modeled using restricted cubic splines).
a Patients with history of a tick bite at the site of the EM skin lesion. The information is missing for 20 culture-positive and 15 culture-negative patients.
b Information missing for 1 culture-positive patient and 2 culture-negative patients.
c Information missing for 1 culture-positive patient.
d Information missing for 4 culture-positive patients.
e Information missing for 27 culture-positive and 11 culture-negative patients.
f Information missing for 2 culture-positive patients.
g Some patients had more than one symptom.
h Seasonal occurrence of skin biopsy was defined as the number of days between the visit to the Lyme borreliosis outpatient clinic and January 1st of the same year.
α OR for 10-year increase in age.
β OR for 7-day increase in EM duration.
γ Restricted cubic splines were used to flexibly model the relationship between the covariate and culture positivity. Estimated ORs comparing different values are reported for descriptive purposes only.
Association between the main characteristics required for the diagnosis of erythema migrans skin lesion and culture positivity, estimated using multiple logistic regression.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Expansion | 1.21 ( 0.94; 1.55) | 0.14 |
| Central clearing | 1.04 ( 0.82; 1.34) | 0.73 |
| Largest diameter of erythema migrans ≥5 cm | 2.93 (1.19; 7.20) | 0.02 |
| Presence of non-specific symptoms | 0.96 (0.74; 1.25) | 0.77 |
| Tick bite | 0.07 | |
| Bite with delay in appearance vs. no bite | 1.02 (0.79; 1.31) | |
| Bite without delay in appearance vs. no bite | 0.29 (0.09; 0.92) |
a Each odds ratio (OR) is adjusted for all the other variables in the table.
Figure 3
Figure 4