Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of nine serological tests for diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis

  • Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two hundred serum specimens including 13 sera from patients with early Lyme borreliosis, 21 patients with late Lyme borreliosis, 15 rheumatoid factor positive sera, 31 sera from patients with syphilis and 84 sera from healthy controls were used to evaluate the following assays for the detection of antibodies toBorrelia burgdorferi: two in-house enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), two in-house immunofluorescent antibody assays (IFAs), a commercial haemagglutination assay (HA) (Diagast) and four commercial EIAs (Diagast, Dako, Diamedix, Whittaker Bioproducts). In early and late Lyme borreliosis sera sensitivity ranged from 8 % to 62 % and from 62 % to 86 % respectively. With the exception of the Dako EIA, which was significantly more sensitive in early Lyme borreliosis (62 %) than the Diagast HA (8 %) (p=0.05), differences in sensitivity were not significant. In healthy controls the specificity was ≥95 % for all tests. Taking into account sensitivity, specificity, intra-test and inter-test precision, ease of performance and cost, the Dako EIA and Diamedix EIA were shown to be good alternatives to the in-house EIA and in-house IFA. Because of its low sensitivity in diagnosis of both early and late Lyme borreliosis, use of the Diagast HA should be discouraged.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Burgdorfer W, Barbour AG, Hayes SF, Benach JL, Grunwaldt E, Davis JP Lyme disease: a tickborne spirochetose? Science 1982, 216: 1317–1319.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Liu HH Lyme disease: epidemiology, diagnosis, and management. Delaware Medical Journal 1990, 62: 1351–1360.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Steere AC Lyme disease. New England Journal of Medicine 1989, 321: 586–596.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rahn DW Lyme disease: clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 1991, 20: 201–218.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Steere AC, Grodzicki RL, Kornblatt AN, Craft JE, Barbour AG, Burgdorfer W, Schmid GP, Johnson E, Malawista SE The spirochetal etiology of Lyme disease. New England Journal of Medicine 1983, 308: 733–740.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Haupl T, Burmester GR Klinik, Diagnostik und Therapie der Lyme-Borreliose. Zeitschrift für Ärztliche Fortbildung 1992, 86: 6–12.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nadelman RB, Pavia CS, Magnarelli LA, Wormser GP Isolation ofBorrelia burgdorferi from the blood of seven patients with Lyme disease. American Journal of Medicine 1990, 88: 21–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. de Koning J, Bosma RB, Hoogkamp-Korstanje JAA Demonstration of spirochaetes in patients with Lyme disease with a modified silver stain. Journal of Medical Microbiology 1987, 23: 261–267.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Valesova M, Trnavsky K, Hulinska D, Alusik S, Janousek J, Jirous J Detection ofBorrelia in the synovial tissue from a patient with Lyme borreliosis by electron microscopy. Journal of Rheumatology 1989, 16: 1502–1505.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Banyas GT Difficulties with Lyme serology. Journal of the American Optometric Association 1992, 63: 135–139.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dattwyler RJ, Volkman DJ, Luft BJ, Halperin JJ, Thomas J, Golightly MG Seronegative Lyme disease. Dissociation of specific T- and B lymphocyte responses toBorrelia burgdorferi. New England Journal of Medicine 1988, 319: 1441–1446.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hyde FW, Johnson RC, White TJ, Shelburne CE Detection of antigens in urine of mice and humans infected withBorrelia burgdorferi, etiologic agent of Lyme disease. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1989, 27: 58–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Melchers W, Meis J, Rosa P, Claas E, Nohlmans L, Koopman R, Horrevorts A, Galama J Amplification ofBorrelia burgdorferi DNA in skin biopsies from patients with Lyme disease. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1991, 29: 2401–2406.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fahrer H, Sauvain MJ, van der Linden S, Zhioua E, Gern L, Aeschlimann A Prävalenz der Lyme-Borreliose in einer schweizerischen Risikopopulation. Schweizerische Medizinische Wochenschrift 1988, 118: 65–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Huycke MM, D'Alessio DD, Marx JJ Prevalence of antibody toBorrelia burgdorferi by indirect fluorescent antibody assay, ELISA, and Western immunoblot in healthy adults in Wisconsin and Arizona. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1992, 165: 1133–1137.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gustafson R, Svenungsson B, Gardulf A, Stiernstedt G, Forsgren M Prevalence of tick-borne encephalitis and Lyme borreliosis in a defined Swedish population. Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases 1990, 22: 297–306.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nohlmans MK, van den Bogaard AE, Blaauw AA, Boven CP Prevalentie van Lyme-borreliose in Nederland. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 1991, 135: 2288–2292.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Stiernstedt G, Dattwyler R, Duray PH, Hansen K, Jirous J, Johnson RC, Karlsson M, Preac-Mursic V, Schwan TG Diagnostic tests in Lyme borreliosis. Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases 1991, 77, Supplement: 136–142.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Craft JE, Grodzicki RL, Steere AC Antibody response in Lyme disease: Evaluation of diagnostic tests. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1984, 149: 789–795.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilske B, Schierz G, Preac-Mursic V, Weber K, Pfister HW, Einhaupl K Serological diagnosis of erythema migrans disease and related disorders. Infection 1984, 12: 331–337.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Melby K, Steinbakk M, Jensenius M, Figenschau KJ Detection of serum antibodies againstBorrelia burgdorferi with some commercially available serological tests. NIPH Annals 1990, 13: 37–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cutler SJ, Wright DJM Evaluation of three commercial tests for Lyme disease. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 1990, 13: 271–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stiernstedt G, Eriksson G, Enfors W, Jorbeck H, Svenungsson B, Skoldenberg B, Granstrom M Erythema chronicum migrans in Sweden: clinical manifestations and antibodies toIxodes ricinus spirochete measured by indirect immunofluorescence and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases 1986, 18: 217–224.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sticht-Groh Y, Martin R Possible pitfalls of an indirect immunofluorescence assay as the sole serological test in the diagnosis of Lyme disease. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 1988, 7: 84–85.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fawcett PT, Gibney KM, Rose CD, Klein JD, Doughty RA Adsorption with a solubleE. coli antigen fraction improves the specificity of ELISA tests for Lyme disease. Journal of Rheumatology 1991, 18: 705–708.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fawcett PT, O'Brien AE, Doughty RA An adsorption procedure to increase the specificity of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for Lyme disease without decreasing sensitivity. Arthritis and Rheumatism 1989, 32: 1041–1045.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Coleman JL, Benach JL Isolation of antigenic components from the Lyme disease spirochete: their role in early diagnosis. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1987, 155: 756–765.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Grodzicki RL, Steere AC Comparison of immunoblotting and indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using different antigen preparations for diagnosing early Lyme disease. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1988, 157: 790–797.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Magnarelli LA, Andersson JF, Barbour AG Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for Lyme disease: reactivity of subunits ofBorrelia burgdorferi. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1989, 159: 43–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hansen K, Hendersson P, Strandberg-Pederson N Measurement of antibodies to theBorrelia burgdorferi flagellum improves serodiagnosis in Lyme disease. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1988, 26: 338–346.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fister RD, Weymouth LA, McLaughlin JC, Ryan RW, Tilton RC Comparative evaluation of three products for the detection ofBorrelia burdgorferi antibody in human serum. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1989, 27: 2834–2837.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Putzker M, Mertes T, Faulde M, Sobe D Gegenüberstellung der Exoproteinmuster dreier europäischer Isolate vonBorrelia burgdorferi. Vergleich von 14 kommerziell erhältlichen und einem selbst entwickelten und evaluierten ELISA für die serologische Diagnostik der Lyme-Borreliose. Laboratoriums-Medizin 1990, 14: 397–403.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Luft BJ, Jiang W, Munoz P, Dattwyler RJ, Gorevic PD Biochemical and immunological characterization of the surface proteins ofBorrelia burgdorferi. Infection and Immunity 1989, 57: 3637–3642.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Christenson VD, White DH Evaluation of four commercially available ELISA assays for the serologic diagnosis of Lyme disease. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis 1991, 5: 340–343.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Luger SW, Krauss E Serologic tests for Lyme disease: interlaboratory variability. Archives of Internal Medicine 1990, 150: 761–763.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Schwartz BS, Goldstein MD, Ribeiro JMC, Schulze TL, Shahied SJ Antibody testing in Lyme disease. A comparison of results in four laboratories. Journal of the American Medical Association 1989, 262: 3431–3434.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Microbiology, State University of Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    M. K. E. Nohlmans, A. E. J. van den Bogaard & C. P. A. van Boven

  2. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, University Hospital Maastricht, P. Debyelaan 25, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    A. A. M. Blaauw

Authors
  1. M. K. E. Nohlmans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. A. M. Blaauw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. E. J. van den Bogaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. P. A. van Boven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nohlmans, M.K.E., Blaauw, A.A.M., van den Bogaard, A.E.J. et al. Evaluation of nine serological tests for diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 13, 394–400 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01971996

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01971996

Keywords

Search

Navigation