Serodiagnosis of Borreliosis: Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Immunoblotting
Iwona Wojciechowska‐Koszko, Iwona Mączyńska, Zbigniew Szych, Stefania Giedrys‐Kalemba
Abstract
Iwona Wojciechowska‐Koszko, Iwona Mączyńska, Zbigniew Szych, Stefania Giedrys‐Kalemba
Abstract
Lyme disease is an infectious, multi-system, tick-borne disease caused by genospecies of Borrelia burgdorferi bacteria sensu lato, characterized by remarkable heterogeneity. In this situation choosing an optimal antigen array for diagnostic tests seems problematic. The serological tests for borrelia routinely done in laboratories often produce ambiguous results, which makes a proper diagnosis rather complicated and thus delays the implementation of an appropriate treatment regimen. Thirty-seven outpatients and eight inpatients with suspected borreliosis diagnosis hospitalized at the Clinics of the Pomeranian Medical University (Szczecin, Poland), participated in the study. In order to detect the antibodies against Borrelia sensu lato three kinds of serological tests were used: indirect immunofluorescence assay (IIFA), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and immunoblot. The IIFA and immunoblot tests conducted on 45 patients (100%) produced positive results for both the IgM and IgG antibody types. In the case of ELISA, positive or borderline results were observed in only 24 patients (53.3%). The immunoblot test for IgM most frequently detected antibodies against the outer surface protein C (OspC) antigen (p25), and, in the case of IgG, against the recombinant variable surface antigen (VlsE). The IIFA screening test used for diagnosing Lyme borreliosis produced the highest percentage of positive results, which were then confirmed by immunoblot, but not by ELISA. Therefore using only ELISA as a screening test or for diagnosing Lyme borreliosis seems debatable.
OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Lyme disease is an infectious, multi-system, tick-borne disease caused by genospecies of Borrelia burgdorferi bacteria sensu lato, characterized by remarkable heterogeneity. In this situation choosing an optimal antigen array for diagnostic tests seems problematic. The serological tests for borrelia routinely done in laboratories often produce ambiguous results, which makes a proper diagnosis rather complicated and thus delays the implementation of an appropriate treatment regimen. Thirty-seven outpatients and eight inpatients with suspected borreliosis diagnosis hospitalized at the Clinics of the Pomeranian Medical University (Szczecin, Poland), participated in the study. In order to detect the antibodies against Borrelia sensu lato three kinds of serological tests were used: indirect immunofluorescence assay (IIFA), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and immunoblot. The IIFA and immunoblot tests conducted on 45 patients (100%) produced positive results for both the IgM and IgG antibody types. In the case of ELISA, positive or borderline results were observed in only 24 patients (53.3%). The immunoblot test for IgM most frequently detected antibodies against the outer surface protein C (OspC) antigen (p25), and, in the case of IgG, against the recombinant variable surface antigen (VlsE). The IIFA screening test used for diagnosing Lyme borreliosis produced the highest percentage of positive results, which were then confirmed by immunoblot, but not by ELISA. Therefore using only ELISA as a screening test or for diagnosing Lyme borreliosis seems debatable.
Key concepts: Serology, Borrelia burgdorferi, Lyme disease, Borrelia, Antigen, Antibody, Immunology, Biology