ArticlePostepy dermatologii i alergologii2015
Comparison of detection of Borrelia burgdorferi DNA and anti-Borrelia burgdorferi antibodies in patients with erythema migrans in north-eastern Poland.
Article in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent strategies for the diagnosis of early Lyme disease.Science progress · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiagnostic methods in erythema migrans are still not standardized.
aimTo evaluate the frequency of Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. DNA presence in patients with erythema migrans (EM); to assess the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) procedure for detecting B. burgdorferi s.l. DNA in patients with the skin form of Lyme borreliosis; and to compare the results of the PCR-based method with the traditional ELISA method. MATERIAL AND
methodsSkin biopsy and blood samples from 93 patients with EM were examined for B. burgdorferi s.l. DNA detection (PCR). Seventy-one of these patients were examined for the presence of anti-B. burgdorferi s.l. antibodies (ELISA).
resultsBorrelia burgdorferi s.l. DNA was detected in 48% of the skin biopsy specimens and in 2% of blood samples. Only 1 patient was PCR positive in both blood and skin samples. Seventy percent of patients whose PCR results were positive were bitten by a tick less than 14 days before. IgM anti-B. burgdorferi s.l - specific antibodies were present in the serum of 35% of patients and IgG antibodies - in 30% of patients. Seventeen percent were positive in both IgM and IgG.
conclusionsPolymerase chain reaction of skin biopsy specimens seems to be currently the most sensitive and specific test for the diagnosis of patients with EM, especially in patients with a short duration of the disease (< 14 days) but still its effectiveness is much lower than expected. Polymerase chain reaction of blood samples cannot be recommended at the present time for the routine diagnostic of patients with EM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.