Management of paediatric Lyme disease in non-endemic and endemic areas: data from the Registry of the Italian Society for Pediatric Infectious Diseases
The purpose of this investigation was to determine how specialists in paediatric infectious diseases (PIDs) manage children with suspected Lyme disease (LD) by comparing their approaches in Italian endemic and non-endemic areas. A cross-sectional survey of the PID specialists participating in the Italian Society for Pediatric Infectious Disease (SITIP) Registry of LD was carried out between 1 January and 30 April 2012. A total of 160 children (80 living in endemic areas and 80 living in non-endemic areas) were diagnosed as having LD between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2011. The clinical manifestations were erythema migrans in 130 cases (81.3 %), arthritis in 24 (15.0 %) and neuroborreliosis in six (3.8 %). Significant differences from the recommendations concerning serology and the tests to undertake were mainly observed in the children with erythema migrans, especially those living in non-endemic areas (p < 0.05). The children with erythema migrans who lived in non-endemic areas were treated with antibiotics significantly less frequently than those living in endemic areas (p < 0.05), and significantly fewer children with erythema migrans or arthritis living in non-endemic areas were treated with amoxicillin in comparison with those living in endemic regions (p < 0.05). The duration of antimicrobial therapy was significantly shorter than recommended in the children with erythema migrans or arthritis, especially those living in non-endemic areas (p < 0.05). Paediatric LD is also present in areas of Italy in which it is not considered endemic, but knowledge concerning its management is generally poor among PID specialists and characterised by enormous gaps in non-endemic areas.
This study was supported, in part, by a grant from the Italian Ministry of Health (Bando Giovani Ricercatori 2009).
We would like to thank all the participants of the SITIP Lyme Disease Registry: Marina Camilletti, Elena Danieli, Walter Peves Rios, Simone Sferrazza Papa, Leonardo Terranova, Maria Cristina Tischer, Alberto Zampiero (Milan); Patrizia Isoardi (Monza); Giorgio Bolla (Verona); Filippo Bernardi (Bologna); and Icilio Dodi (Parma).
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
- 6.Wormser GP, Dattwyler RJ, Shapiro ED, Halperin JJ, Steere AC, Klempner MS et al (2006) The clinical assessment, treatment, and prevention of Lyme disease, human granulocytic anaplasmosis, and babesiosis: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 43:1089–1134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Huppertz HI, Bartmann P, Heininger U, Fingerle V, Kinet M, Klein R et al (2012) Rational diagnostic strategies for Lyme borreliosis in children and adolescents: recommendations by the Committee for Infectious Diseases and Vaccinations of the German Academy for Pediatrics and Adolescent Health. Eur J Pediatr. Epub Jul 11Google Scholar
- 18.Istituto Superiore di Sanità. Centro Nazionale Malattie Rare. Malattie rare esentate in Italia. Available online at: http://www.iss.it/cnmr/rnmr/cont.php?id=864&lang=1&tipo=4
- 19.Rizzoli A, Hauffe HC, Carpi G, Vourc’h GI, Neteler M, Rosà E (2011) Lyme borreliosis in Europe. Euro Surveill 16:pii=19906Google Scholar