First name
for
Middle name
Pedi Lyme
Last name
Net

Title

Validation of Septic Knee Monoarthritis Prediction Rule in a Lyme Disease Endemic Area.

Year of Publication

2021

Date Published

2021 May 13

ISSN Number

1535-1815

Abstract

<p><strong>OBJECTIVE: </strong>In Lyme disease endemic areas, Lyme and septic arthritis often present similarly. A published septic knee arthritis clinical prediction rule includes 2 high-risk predictors: absolute neutrophil count of 10,000 cells/mm or greater and erythrocyte sedimentation rate of 40 mm/h or greater. The objective of the study was to externally validate this prediction rule in a multicenter prospective cohort.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>We enrolled a prospective cohort of children with knee monoarthritis undergoing evaluation for Lyme disease at 1 of 8 Pedi Lyme Net emergency departments located in endemic areas. We defined a case of septic arthritis with a positive synovial fluid culture or a synovial fluid white blood cell count of 50,000 or greater per high powered field with a positive blood culture and Lyme arthritis with a positive or equivocal C6 EIA, followed by a positive supplemental immunoblot. Other children were classified as having inflammatory arthritis. We report the performance of the septic arthritis clinical prediction rule in our study population.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>Of the 543 eligible children, 13 had septic arthritis (2.4%), 234 Lyme arthritis (43.1%), and 296 inflammatory arthritis (54.5%). Of the 457 children (84.2%) with available laboratory predictors, all children with septic arthritis were classified as high risk (sensitivity, 100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 62.8%-100%; specificity, 68.1%; 95% CI, 63.6-73.3; negative predictive value, 278/278 [100%]; 95% CI, 98.6%-100%). Of the 303 low-risk children, 52 (17.2%) underwent diagnostic arthrocentesis.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>The septic knee arthritis clinical prediction rule accurately distinguished between septic and Lyme arthritis in an endemic area. Clinical application may reduce unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures.</p>

DOI

10.1097/PEC.0000000000002455

Alternate Title

Pediatr Emerg Care

PMID

34160185

Title

Validation of the Rule of 7's for Identifying Children at Low-risk for Lyme Meningitis.

Year of Publication

2021

Number of Pages

306-309

Date Published

2021 Apr 01

ISSN Number

1532-0987

Abstract

<p><b>BACKGROUND: </b>The Rule of 7's classifies children as low-risk for Lyme meningitis with the absence of the following: ≥7 days of headache, any cranial neuritis or ≥70% cerebrospinal fluid mononuclear cells. We sought to broadly validate this clinical prediction rule in children with meningitis undergoing evaluation for Lyme disease.</p><p><b>METHODS: </b>We performed a patient-level data meta-analysis of 2 prospective and 2 retrospective cohorts of children ≤21 years of age with cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis who underwent evaluation for Lyme disease. We defined a case of Lyme meningitis with a positive 2-tier serology result (positive or equivocal first-tier enzyme immunoassay followed by a positive supplemental immunoblot). We applied the Rule of 7's and report the accuracy for the identification of Lyme meningitis.</p><p><b>RESULTS: </b>Of 721 included children with meningitis, 178 had Lyme meningitis (24.7%) and 543 had aseptic meningitis (75.3%). The pooled data from the 4 studies showed the Rule of 7's has a sensitivity of 98% [95% confidence interval (CI): 89%-100%, I2 = 71%], specificity 40% (95% CI: 30%-50%, I2 = 75%), and a negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI: 95%-100%, I2 = 55%).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>The Rule of 7's accurately identified children with meningitis at low-risk for Lyme meningitis for whom clinicians should consider outpatient management while awaiting Lyme disease test results.</p>

DOI

10.1097/INF.0000000000003003

Alternate Title

Pediatr Infect Dis J

PMID

33710975

Title

A minority of children diagnosed with Lyme disease recall a preceding tick bite.

Year of Publication

2019

Number of Pages

694-696

Date Published

2019 Apr

ISSN Number

1877-9603

Abstract

<p>Of 1770 children undergoing emergency department evaluation for Lyme disease, 362 (20.5%) children had Lyme disease. Of those with an available tick bite history, only a minority of those with Lyme disease had a recognized tick bite (60/325; 18.5%, 95% confidence interval 14.6-23.0%). Lack of a tick bite history does not reliably exclude Lyme disease.</p>

DOI

10.1016/j.ttbdis.2019.02.015

Alternate Title

Ticks Tick Borne Dis

PMID

30853264

Title

Two-Tier Lyme Disease Serology Test Results Can Vary According to the Specific First-Tier Test Used.

Year of Publication

2019

Date Published

2019 Feb 22

ISSN Number

2048-7207

Abstract

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>Variability in 2-tier Lyme disease test results according to the specific first-tier enzyme immunoassay (EIA) in children has not been examined rigorously. In this study, we compared paired results of clinical 2-tier Lyme disease tests to those of the C6 peptide EIA followed by supplemental immunoblotting (C6 2-tier test).</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>We performed a prospective cohort study of children aged ≥1 to ≤21 years who were undergoing evaluation for Lyme disease in the emergency department at 1 of 6 centers located in regions in which Lyme disease is endemic. The clinical first-tier test and a C6 EIA were performed on the same serum sample with supplemental immunoblotting if the first-tier test result was either positive or equivocal. We compared the results of the paired clinical and C6 2-tier Lyme disease test results using the McNemar test.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>Of the 1714 children enrolled, we collected a research serum sample from 1584 (92.4%). The clinical 2-tier EIA result was positive in 316 (19.9%) children, and the C6 2-tier test result was positive or equivocal in 295 (18.6%) children. The clinical and C6 2-tier test results disagreed more often than they would have by chance alone (P = .002). Of the 39 children with either a positive clinical or C6 2-tier test result alone, 2 children had an erythema migrans (EM) lesion, and 29 had symptoms compatible with early disseminated Lyme disease.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>Two-tier Lyme disease test results differed for a substantial number of children on the basis of the specific first-tier test used. In children for whom there is a high clinical suspicion for Lyme disease and who have an initially negative test result, clinicians should consider retesting for Lyme disease.</p>

DOI

10.1093/jpids/piy133

Alternate Title

J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc

PMID

30793167

Title

Accuracy of Clinician Suspicion of Lyme Disease in the Emergency Department.

Year of Publication

2017

Date Published

2017 Nov 24

ISSN Number

1098-4275

Abstract

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>To make initial management decisions, clinicians must estimate the probability of Lyme disease before diagnostic test results are available. Our objective was to examine the accuracy of clinician suspicion for Lyme disease in children undergoing evaluation for Lyme disease.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>We assembled a prospective cohort of children aged 1 to 21 years who were evaluated for Lyme disease at 1 of the 5 participating emergency departments. Treating physicians were asked to estimate the probability of Lyme disease (on a 10-point scale). We defined a Lyme disease case as a patient with an erythema migrans lesion or positive 2-tiered serology results in a patient with compatible symptoms. We calculated the area under the curve for the receiver operating curve as a measure of the ability of clinician suspicion to diagnose Lyme disease.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>We enrolled 1021 children with a median age of 9 years (interquartile range, 5-13 years). Of these, 238 (23%) had Lyme disease. Clinician suspicion had a minimal ability to discriminate between children with and without Lyme disease: area under the curve, 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.79). Of the 554 children who the treating clinicians thought were unlikely to have Lyme disease (score 1-3), 65 (12%) had Lyme disease, and of the 127 children who the treating clinicians thought were very likely to have Lyme disease (score 8-10), 39 (31%) did not have Lyme disease.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>Because clinician suspicion had only minimal accuracy for the diagnosis of Lyme disease, laboratory confirmation is required to avoid both under- and overdiagnosis.</p>

DOI

10.1542/peds.2017-1975

Alternate Title

Pediatrics

PMID

29175973

WATCH THIS PAGE

Subscription is not available for this page.