https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4638-3820
Figures
Abstract
Louse-borne relapsing fever (LBRF) is a classical epidemic disease, which in the past was associated with war, famine, poverty, forced migration, and crowding under poor hygienic conditions around the world. The disease’s causative pathogen, the spirochete bacterium Borrelia recurrentis, is confined to humans and transmitted by a single vector, the human body louse Pediculus humanus. Since the disease has had its heyday before the days of modern medicine, many of its aspects have never been formally studied and to date, remain incompletely understood. In order to shed light on some of these aspects, we have systematically reviewed the accessible literature on LBRF, since the recognition of its mode of transmission in 1907, and summarized the existing data on epidemiology and diagnostic aspects of the disease. Publications were identified by using a predefined search strategy on electronic databases and a subsequent review of the reference lists of the obtained publications. All publications reporting patients with a confirmed diagnosis of LBRF published in English, French, German, and Spanish since 1907 were included. Data extraction followed a predefined protocol and included a grading system to judge the certainty of the diagnosis of reported cases. Historically, Ethiopia is considered a stronghold of LBRF. The recognition of LBRF among East African migrants (originating from Somalia, Eritrea, and Ethiopia) arriving to Europe in the course of the recent migration flow from this region suggests that this epidemiological focus ostensibly persists. Currently, there is neither evidence to support or refute active transmission foci of LBRF elsewhere on the African continent, in Latin America, or in Asia. Microscopy remains the most commonly used method to diagnose LBRF. Data are lacking on sensitivity and specificity of most diagnostic methods.
Author summary
Louse-borne relapsing fever (LBRF) is an ancient epidemic disease, with descriptions dating back to Hippocrates’ times. Linked to war, famine, poverty, forced migration, and crowding under poor hygienic conditions, the disease has accompanied humankind throughout history and, until 100 years ago, the disease was well recognized among physicians in European and North American countries. Since then, the disease has fallen into oblivion, and reports of the disease are largely confined to Ethiopia. However, the disease has recently resurfaced when it was recognized as a cause of fever in East African migrants (originating from Somalia, Eritrea, and Ethiopia) arriving to Europe. Since the disease has had its heyday before the days of modern medicine, many aspects of the disease have never been formally studied and to date, remain incompletely understood. In order to shed light on some of these aspects, we have reviewed and analyzed the accessible literature on LBRF since its mode of transmission was recognized in 1907 and compiled this 2-part review focusing on epidemiology and diagnostic aspects (part 1) and mortality, Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction (JHR), and impact on pregnancy (part 2). We deliberately did not include an analysis on the antimicrobial treatment of LBRF, as Guerrier and Doherty have published a comprehensive meta-analysis on this aspect in 2011.
Citation: Kahlig P, Paris DH, Neumayr A (2021) Louse-borne relapsing fever—A systematic review and analysis of the literature: Part 1—Epidemiology and diagnostic aspects. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 15(3): e0008564. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008564
Editor: Jon Blevins, UAMS, UNITED STATES
Published: March 11, 2021
Copyright: © 2021 Kahlig et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Louse-borne relapsing fever (LBRF) is an ancient epidemic disease, with descriptions dating back to Hippocrates’ times [1]. Linked to war, famine, poverty, forced migration, and crowding under poor hygienic conditions, the disease has accompanied mankind throughout history and was once even described as the “most epidemic among the epidemic diseases” [2]. The use of the name “relapsing fever” was first documented by Craigie and Henderson during the epidemic which occurred in Edinburgh from 1843 until 1848 [3,4], reviewed by Greig 100 years later [5]. Milestones in the disease’s history were the discovery of the causative organism by Obermeier in Berlin in 1873 [6], the discovery of the organism in the vector by Mackie in India in 1907 [7], and the description of the mode of transmission by Sergent and Foley in Algeria in the same year [8,9]. In history, LBRF had a massive impact, especially following political crisis, socioeconomic disaster, and war [10,11].
Since the disease had its peak incidence and prevalence before the days of modern medicine, many aspects of the disease have never been formally studied and remain incompletely understood to date. In order to shed light on epidemiological and diagnostic aspects, we reviewed and analyzed the available published data on LBRF since its transmission was identified in 1907.
Epidemiology
With the reduction of the vector Pediculus humanus, due to improved living standards along with the introduction of the insecticide dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) in the 1940s, LBRF declined and finally disappeared from most regions of the world, as well as from most medical text books, over the past century [10,12].
In the last decades, reports of cases were almost exclusively limited to the Horn of Africa [10,11] and LBRF was increasingly considered a disappearing, neglected tropical disease (NTD) [12] until the disease recently resurfaced as non-malarial febrile illness in East African migrants arriving from Somalia, Eritrea, and Ethiopia to Europe [13–17]. Although several authors extensively reviewed the epidemiology of LBRF in Africa and Europe [18–26] and several studies and book chapters describe remaining endemic foci of LBRF in Africa, South America, and Asia [13,22,24,25,27–36], there is very little reliable data on the disease’s true past and present epidemiology, especially in Latin America and Asia (Fig 1).
LBRF, louse-borne relapsing fever; TBRF, tick-borne relapsing fever.
In order to shed light on the global epidemiology of LBRF over the past 100 years, we reviewed all available published reports on LBRF cases and summarized their number, their time of occurrence, and the grade of evidence for their correct diagnosis. Additionally, we performed an in-depth analysis of the rather unclear past and present situation of LBRF in Latin America and Asia.
Diagnostic aspects
Before the causative organism of LBRF was identified in 1873 [6], the diagnosis was exclusively based on signs and symptoms. However, since other febrile illnesses may present with similar signs and symptoms (e.g., “louse-borne typhus” caused by Rickettsia prowazekii, typhoid fever, or leptospirosis) as well as recurrent or periodic episodes of fever (e.g., tick-borne relapsing fever [TBRF], malaria, or the louse-borne “trench fever” caused by Bartonella quintana), it is probable that these diagnoses were often confused. After the discovery of the causative organism, microscopy of blood films became the diagnostic gold standard for LBRF. In thick and thin blood films (stained with Giemsa, May–Grünwald–Giemsa, Wright, Wright–Giemsa, Field’s, or Diff-Quick stains or examined under dark field), Borrelia spirochetes are identifiable by their typical morphology (Fig 2). However, since Borrelia recurrentis is microscopically undifferentiatable from Borrelia spp. causing TBRF, true diagnostic confirmation of LBRF only became available with the introduction of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and sequencing techniques in the 1980s. However, considering the disease’s transmission, certain circumstances (e.g., outbreaks, epidemics, and occurrence in a vulnerable population) add conclusive epidemiological evidence and support the microscopical diagnosis as LBRF rather than TBRF. This does not apply to sporadic cases, where the way of transmission (i.e., ticks in an endemic region) rather supports TBRF. Nevertheless, microscopic examination has been the gold standard for diagnosing relapsing fever [37,38].
a) Drawing of B. recurrentis spirochetes found in a thin blood film obtained from a patient suffering from LBRF in 1909 in Jaipur, India [39]. b) Photography of B. recurrentis spirochetes found in a thin blood smear (May–Grünwald–Giemsa stain, magnification 1,000-fold) obtained from an Eritrean migrant suffering from LBRF in 2015 in Basel, Switzerland. LBRF, louse-borne relapsing fever; TBRF, tick-borne relapsing fever. Image credit: Dr. Michael Osthoff.
Serology has been used as alternative diagnostic method, but shows limited specificity due to cross-reactivity among Borrelia spp., including TBRF, as well as with other spirochetes (e.g., Treponema pallidum) [25,35,36]. Moreover, within endemic regions, the interpretation of serological assays is often complicated by high background reactivity and sero-scars (persistence of detectable antibodies after infection) in addition to the fact that the respective laboratory capacity and expertise are mostly unavailable. Furthermore, since seroconversion demands time, serology is not helpful to diagnose acute infection. Thus, serology was never developed into commercial available assays, and microscopy remains the sole and most widely available diagnostic tool to date [40]. With the introduction of PCR-based methods, the diagnostic sensitivity improved markedly, and species differentiation of relapsing fever Borrelia became available [41,42]. However, the availability is still largely restricted to affluent countries and research settings.
Table 1 lists the advantages and disadvantages of the laboratory diagnostic and research methods applied in LBRF.
In order to shed light on the evolution of LBRF diagnostics over the past 100 years and the accuracy of different test methods, we reviewed the available literature and summarized the available data.
Methods
A systematic review protocol established for this review is available in the Supporting information section (S1 Text). The electronic databases BIOSIS, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Current Contents Connect, Elsevier, EMBASE Ovid, Ovid MEDLINE, PMC, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched on October 4, 2017 using the search term ((Relapsing AND fever AND (Louse OR Lice OR (Pediculus AND humanus))) OR (Borrelia AND recurrentis) OR LBRF). A second and third search, using the same search term on the same databases, was conducted on August 7, 2018 and June 17, 2019, respectively. After checking for and removing duplicates (using EndNote software and manually [43]), publications were prescreened by checking titles and abstracts if they concerned patient(s) with the diagnosis of LBRF. Publications not reporting patient(s) with the diagnosis of LBRF were excluded. The remaining publications were then full-text assessed for fulfillment of the inclusion criteria: reporting conclusively diagnosed case(s) of LBRF and published after 1907 (the year when the disease’s mode of transmission was discovered) and published in English, French, German, or Spanish. Publications not fulfilling the inclusion criteria were excluded. Publications that could neither be retrieved through their respective journals, nor by contacting libraries, or after contacting the authors, were classified as “not retrievable” and excluded. Additional relevant publications identified when reading the full-text articles or checking their reference lists were reviewed and included if they fulfilled the inclusion criteria (“snowball” search strategy).
A data extraction sheet for screening and selecting eligible publications was developed and is available in the Supporting information section (S2 Text). The following data were extracted from eligible publications using a standardized excel spreadsheet: patient characteristics (number of patients, age, gender, origin, occupation, social status, and way and duration of migration), diagnostic method (microscopy and molecular method), symptoms and signs (fever, chills, myalgia, headache, hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, signs of hemorrhage, and others), treatment (number of treated and untreated patients, drug, dosage, and duration and route of administration), and outcome (Jarisch–Herxheimer reaction (JHR), abortion/stillbirth, premature delivery, and mortality).
To minimize bias, the same reviewer conducted a second full data extraction more than 1 month after the first extraction. Discrepant results and unclear cases were resolved by consulting a second reviewer.
In order to consider the probability of a correct diagnosis of LBRF, all reviewed cases were graded according to the used diagnostic method and respectively classified (Table 2).
To visualize the worldwide epidemiology of LBRF over the past century, data of all identified cases were entered into a geographic information system (GIS) application (https://www.qgis.org/en/site/) and graphically displayed using geodata from Natural Earth (https://www.naturalearthdata.com/about/terms-of-use/).
The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement (S1 Checklist).
Results
Our search strategy identified 4,943 publications of which 184 finally proved eligible for being included and analyzed (Fig 3, S1 Fig). A list of included and excluded publications is available in the Supporting information section (S3 Text).
LBRF, louse-borne relapsing fever.
From the 184 included publications, data of 18,613 LBRF cases were extracted (S1 Data). A total of 16,632 cases (90%) were microscopically diagnosed, 1,882 cases (10%) were clinically diagnosed, and 99 cases (0.5%) were confirmed by PCR (the majority after primarily being diagnosed by microscopy) (Table 3).
Epidemiology
The geographic localisation of all included LBRF cases is displayed in Fig 4 according to the following criteria: (i) time of occurrence; (ii) autochthonous versus imported; and (iii) underlying diagnostic certainty.
Each data point on the map corresponds to one of the analyzed 184 publications. If 2 or more studies reported cases from the same location, the dots representing these studies are connected by a circle with its center corresponding to this location. LBRF, louse-borne relapsing fever; PCR, polymerase chain reaction. (Map data: Natural Earth).
Publications reporting only indirect evidence for the presence of LBRF (but no clinical cases) are summarized in Table 4.
Reports on imported cases of LBRF are summarized in Tables 5 and 6.
Reports on the occurrence of LBRF in Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East are summarized in Tables 7–13.
In Fig 5, the number of published LBRF cases is visualized in relation to the number of publications.
For better visualization, the number of publications is multiplied by 100. The red arrow depicts the trendline of publications reporting imported cases of LBRF. LBRF, louse-borne relapsing fever.
Discussion
Epidemiology
Latin America.
The last conclusive evidence of the occurrence of LBRF in Latin America dates back almost a century and is restricted to Peru. This notably contrasts the assumed occurence of the disease in South America in the mid-20th century published by Felsenfeld in 1971 (Fig 1) (Note: The method used to create the map is not known to us; the question marks within the map suggest some degree of uncertainty). We did not find any evidence supporting the persistent occurence of LBRF foci in Peru beyond the 1920s, nor did we find any reports on the occurrence of LBRF in other countries of Latin America.
Asia and the Middle East.
Reports from Asia often coincide with times of colonialization as well as wars that western countries were involved in, when medical officers published their observations during their service. Subsequently, publications ceased shortly after the ends of conflicts and colonialization. The most recent examples were the Second World War and the Korean War. However, endemic foci may have persisted among a certain population at risk, as it currently does in Ethiopia, which simply were not detected or not published in western languages. It seems unlikely that the disease vanished as abruptly as publications ceased. A publication bias seems likely for these regions. However, our findings strikingly contrast the assumed occurence of LBRF in Asia in the mid-20th century published by Felsenfeld in 1971 (Fig 1).
China: The last published report dealing with microscopically diagnosed LBRF cases linked to China dates back to 1946, when relapsing fever was reported in Chinese soldiers just flown into Assam, India (Table 9). No reports on cases of LBRF exist from China thereafter.
Korea and Japan: Scarce data are available from Korea, where LBRF occurred and was confirmed until the end of the Korean War (Table 10). A retrospective description suggests a far wider spread than assumed in English literature and describes existing publications in Japanese or Korean language before the Korean War [90]. Thereafter, no information is available.
Southeast Asia: Data from Southeast Asia, where LBRF was reported in Vietnam and Cambodia, are very limited, and no information is available after 1912 and 1958, respectively (Table 11). Remaining residua past that can neither be confirmed nor excluded.
Indian subcontinent: Many accounts were published from the Indian subcontinent, where the disease often occurred in epidemics and endemic foci (Table 12). Investigations in the North-West Frontier province, nowadays located in Pakistan, led to the belief that both the louse-borne and the tick-borne variety are endemic in these areas, suggesting that careful watch should be kept for a sufficient differentiation of LBRF to TBRF [107]. The diagnosis of the reported sporadic cases was established after careful consideration of TBRF as a differential diagnosis. The author notes further that in most cases, blood was taken after symptoms resolved. Therefore, most microscopic examinations were negative. As there was no further data on the positive results, all cases were considered as clinically diagnosed. A worker informed the authors in a personal communication that LBRF had been known in the area for many years [107]. The last published report from 1990 microscopically diagnosed LBRF in 2 patients in 1984 to 1985 [111]. Despite the authors titling this discovery B. recurrentis, there is neither sufficient clinical evidence nor conclusive case histories to retrospectively comprehend how the differentiation was achieved. The authors noted that the disease is common in the Karachi region; however, their work lacks discussion as to whether these cases belong to the tick-borne or louse-borne species [111]. The study was included due to positive blood smears and the authors publishing the data as B. recurrentis. However, considering the circumstances, the evidence should be regarded with caution. Further studies are needed from this area to either confirm or rebut the presence of LBRF in these areas.
Afghanistan and Middle East: Accounts on LBRF from former Persia and Mesopotamia are closely related to the World Wars and the medical officers who published their reports, with no further information published thereafter (Table 13). Migration of refugees, prisoners of war, and the movement of Russian, Turkish, and Indian troops were often reported to be the main cause for the infection of western troops with the disease [113,114,116]. Many of the occurrences mentioned were traced back to troop movements, close contact with the native population or the recruiting of refugees for labor corps [113,114,116–118]. A report from Iran in 1976 found borreliae in a febrile patient, suggesting a new species in the area, although noting a similarity to the malady known from Ethiopia. Despite the suspicions, no further research on the means of transmission has been conducted. For this reason, the species of borreliae found in Iran remains inconclusive [139]. Caution should be taken regarding sporadic cases, as the authors themselves and others noted the presence of TBRF in these areas [119,139].
Imported cases.
Living in cramped and poor hygienic conditions provides favorable conditions for the transmission of LBRF [19,20,45,134,140–145]. As this is the case for many immigrants, refugees, and seasonal workers, human migration is a critical component in the development of LBRF epidemics. In the last century, when the presence of LBRF was almost worldwide, only sporadic cases of imported LBRF were reported. In recent years, the proportional discrepancy between the number of reports from endemic regions and reports on imported cases to non-endemic countries is striking: Between 2010 and 2019, 25 publications reported 78 imported cases of LBRF in non-endemic countries, whereas from endemic regions, 7 publications reported 431 autochthonous cases (Fig 5). This increase in reports on imported cases of LBRF is primarily attributable to the increased migration flow from Africa to Europe observed in 2015 and 2016. Most of these cases were diagnosed using PCR-based methods.
Persistence of LBRF and factors perpetuating the disease.
The vector: The transmitting vector P. humanus [146] is a specialized human ectoparasite that flourishes in hygienically poor and overcrowded conditions [11,146]. Besides B. recurrentis, it also transmits R. prowazekii and B. quintana, the causative agents of epidemic typhus and trench fever, respectively [146]. Experiments demonstrated that B. recurrentis is not transmitted by ticks [147]. The body louse is currently the only proven vector, and humans are the only known reservoir [11]. Body lice live and lay eggs in clothing and only approach the human body for an obligate blood meal [40]. A factor that perpetuates transmission, especially during epidemics, is that lice are temperature sensitive and tend to leave patients clothes during febrile episodes [22]. Interestingly, body lice were reported on secondhand clothing found on a street market in Italy in 2018, making it the first report of human body lice since 1945 in Italy [148]. This finding challenges the paradigm that body lice die quickly once off the host.
Transmission: Unlike most vector borne infections, B. recurrentis is not transmitted to the human host during the blood sucking act of the vector, as the digestive tract and the salivary glands of the body louse are not affected by the infection [11,86,149,150]. Since the louse’s hemolymph was found to harbor B. recurrentis, human infection is traditionally considered to result from damaging or crushing the louse, thus liberating the insect’s hemolymph. The co-liberated bacteria were then considered to enter the human host through microlesions of the skin, which are either caused by the bite itself or by scratching induced by the itchiness of the bites [11]. This transcutaneous route of infection is supported by animal [80] as well as human experiments [86,151]. In 1938, Chung and colleagues identified B. recurrentis in the feces of lice and suggested this as an additional source of infection, with the caveat that in their experiments, the excreted spirochetes were dead [86]. The issue remained dormant until 2005, when Houhamdi and Raoult reported the detection of living B. recurrentis in excreted feces of an infected louse, which revived the discussion [152]. However, whether the fecal excretion of B. recurrentis is relevant for the pathogens transmission still remains to be clarified.
Unnoticed reservoir?
Asymptomatic cases: Asymptomatic cases of LBRF in Sudan were observed by Atkey in 1930 [153]. These cases appeared toward the end of an epidemic, and spirochetes were readily found in their blood. The author further observed a general milder course of the disease toward the end of the epidemic [153]. Another author reported latent and atypical LBRF infections [154]. During an outbreak survey conducted in Khartoum in 1969, 22 microscopically positive but asymptomatic cases of LBRF were identified among 979 immigrant laborers from southern Sudan [134]. The fact that such cases have been reported may imply a high number of overlooked cases. Further research is needed to confirm the existence of asymptomatic cases and to assess the rate of asymptomatic infections since they may contribute to the persistence of the disease in certain areas.
Residual brain infection: Residual brain infection (RBI) describes the tendency of spirochetes to persist in the brain after they have cleared from the blood and was first described by Buschke and Kroo with TBRF in an animal model [38]. Data for B. recurrentis are scarce. One study demonstrated infection of squirrels using cerebrospinal fluids of LBRF patients [87]. Other studies demonstrated B. recurrentis in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients [155] and infection of the brain of primates [121]. The involvement of the central nervous system in the acute phase of LBRF infection was suggested in up to 30% of cases [36]. However, a review article suggested that most of neurologic symptoms in LBRF infection may be due to hemorrhages in the central nervous system, rather than direct involvement of the spirochetes [38]. In animal experiments with Borrelia turicatae, RBI was found in 19% of immunocompentent mice [156]. Another study using a murine model to investigate RBI using B. turicatae, Borrelia crocidurae, Borrelia hermsii, and B. duttonii found limited brain persistence in B. crocidurae and longest persistence for B. duttonii. Additionally, reactivation of the infection was demonstrated in the case of immunosuppression. The authors suggested the brain as reservoir [157]. Further studies are needed to investigate RBI.
Historic point of view: Many hypotheses were discussed regarding the question of persistence and maintenance of the disease between large epidemics. As an example, in North Africa, despite systematic research, no LBRF cases were identified between the 2 large epidemics of 1908 to 1920 and 1943 to 1945 [2]. Considering that LBRF has no currently known host other than humans, that there is currently no known reservoir, that lice do not transmit B. recurrentis to their progeny, and that transmission requires injury or crushing of the louse, the persistence of the disease was a mystery. Two hypotheses were formulated around 1960 concerning the origins of epidemics: (i) the epidemics of LBRF are only a temporary phenomenon due to a mutation of a tick-borne species by passage through the human into the louse; and (ii) the existence of reservoirs in an endemic focus from where epidemics originate [2]. Regarding the first hypothesis, it was experimentally achieved to infect lice with tick-borne species [2]. In one study, lice were infected with B. duttonii and successfully transmitted back to primates [158]. However, no mutations or changes in pathogenic character were observed, and no evidence supporting this hypothesis was found in vivo. Regarding the second hypothesis, Ethiopia was recognized to be an endemic focus by Sparrow [133]. Since then, Ethiopia has remained an endemic focus. It seems likely that the persistence of endemic foci were the origins of the former epidemics, rather than the first mentioned, or any other hypothesis. Asymptomatic infections and RBIs most probably serve as factors that further perpetuate the persistence of LBRF in an endemic focus.
New endemic foci?
Most of the recently imported cases originated from the Horn of Africa. In one refugee from Mali, contact with people migrating from this area was reported. The location of a current endemic focus has been suspected in Libya, which reportedly serves as a focal point for smugglers to bring refugees across the Mediterranean Sea [15,32,159]. Even though there is no published evidence to confirm the suspicions, a temporary unnoticed endemic focus in certain refugee camps or places where migrants have gathered is likely. The duration of a migrant’s journey from East Africa to Europe largely exceeds the reported incubation periods of LBRF. It is probable that refugees go through the first attack and the following relapses during the first month of their journey. The fact that these patients have showed first symptoms upon arrival in Europe suggests an endemic focus around the Mediterranean Sea. This could have been a temporary focus, as it vanished after 2016 without further reports from imported cases thereafter. However, the epidemiological investigation in this review has shown that there is currently no other known endemic focus than Ethiopia.
Migrants and the homeless population, overlooked small outbreaks in Europe?
Since the Second World War, there has been no reported outbreak of LBRF in Europe. In 2005, one study indicated that there may have been a small outbreak among the homeless population in Marseille based on the detection of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to B. recurrentis [29]. In Marseille, about 60% of the homeless population notably consists of migrants [29,160]. It is possible that an imported, unnoticed case could have caused a small epidemic among the high-risk population of homeless people. According to several studies, these people are commonly found infested with body lice, and in some instances further infected with other louse-borne pathogens, such as B. quintana [161–164]. A case report from Saudi-Arabia described B. recurrentis in a homeless man [165]. A report from Italy suggested that 2 migrants acquired the disease in a housing facility of newly arrived refugees. The authors noted that the disease was only diagnosed because of the microscopic blood smear investigations for malaria conducted due to the patients’ recent migration history. They further stated that febrile patients without travel history may receive empirical antibiotic treatment, which may result in the resolution of symptoms without further investigation [60]. Given the susceptibility of borreliae to common empirical antibiotic treatment and the unspecific symptoms of the disease, such minor outbreaks may be easily overlooked. Moreover, vulnerable population groups, such as the homeless, may have limited access to medical care. Under these premises, the introduction of a single case into such surroundings may be sufficient to create a small, unnoticed outbreak.
Thus, in regard to LBRF, close attention should be paid to patients from vulnerable population groups, such as migrants or the homeless that display febrile symptoms. Considering asymptomatic cases, publication bias, and possible temporary foci somewhere along migration routes, another reemergence of the disease should neither be neglected nor its epidemic potential be underestimated.
New vector?
Interestingly, two studies found DNA of B. recurrentis in head lice obtained from humans in the Republic of Congo and Ethiopia [47,48]. They raise the question whether head lice can transmit human louse-borne pathogens. The evidence suggests that head lice, contrary to former belief, may act as a vector. However, further research is necessary to investigate the role of head lice in the transmission of louse-borne pathogens.
Diagnostic aspects
Microscopy.
Microscopy remains the gold standard for diagnosing LBRF since the discovery of the organism in 1867. The sensitivity, however, is directly affected both by the number of spirochetes in the blood and whether the blood sample was taken during a febrile or afebrile period of the infection. Blood should be obtained during a febrile period [19,36–38,124], yet it is possible, though very hard, to find spirochetes during afebrile periods [124]. Although data on sensitivity are scarce, one study reported spirochetes in 38% of patients whose blood had been taken during an afebrile period [155], and another study reported positive microscopy in 5% during afebrile periods [27]. The number of positive results may be increased through the examination of repeated blood smears [36]. Furthermore, the results are often dependant on the fixative and staining method used [25]. Additionally, the level of experience the observer has is another issue that can influence sensitivity [166]. Five cases were identified that reported negative microscopy but positive PCR. In one case, blood was taken the day after initiation of adequate empirical antibiotic therapy [57], and in the other four, reasons remain unknown [69,167]. One study reported positive blood smears, but only after reexamination by an experienced microbiologist [65]. The sensitivity of 70% reported in 1969 was obtained through analysis of both tick-borne and LBRF cases [36], hence may not be fully representative for B. recurrentis specifically. Research into the validation of the enhancement methods is needed and has already been suggested [136].
Animal inoculation, serology, and PCR.
Animal vaccination has been used to aid diagnosis, for research purposes and to some extent as a tool to differentiate between TBRF and LBRF. However, animal inoculation has never been routinely used for diagnostic reasons alone. Lack of standardized data and protocol is further limiting this method [25]. Historically, serological methods were extensively investigated, but the development was hampered by antigenetic variability and cross-reactivity [25,27,34,38,125–128]. To date, serology is not routinely used for diagnosis and is not recommended. PCR-based methods lack availability in poor countries, however, are unquestionably the best and arguably only means for a certain diagnosis of LBRF. Still, protocols for differentiation of B. recurrentis and B. duttonii need to be established. Due to the proximity of these relapsing fever borreliae, development of specific diagnostic tools and accurate discrimination between the species are challenging [131].
Considering that roughly 90% of all published LBRF cases have been diagnosed by microscopy and that microscopy continues to be the most widely used and available diagnostic method, there is a need to determine its sensitivity and to evaluate how to increase sensitivity by serial investigations and/or enhancement methods. Negative microscopy results should be regarded critically, since the last available sensitivity data from 1969 suggested a sensitivity of 70% on a single blood smear. Positive microscopy should be regarded critically, especially in areas where TBRF is endemic. The data show that microbiological methods were mainly used in Europe. In Ethiopia, the country most affected by the disease, microscopy remains the main diagnostic tool.
Key Learning Points
- Currently, East Africa remains the only endemic focus of louse-borne relapsing fever (LBRF).
- Human migration has repeatedly imported the disease into non-endemic countries.
- Although polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods are the only means of species identification, microscopy remains the gold standard in diagnosing LBRF.
Top Five Papers
- Warrell DA. Louse-borne relapsing fever (Borrelia recurrentis infection). Epidemiol Infect. 2019;147:e106. doi: 10.1017/S0950268819000116
- Bryceson ADM, Parry EHO, Perine PL, Warrell DA, Vukotich D, Leithead CS. A clinical and laboratory study of 62 cases in ethiopia and a reconsideration of the literature. QJM. 1970;39(1):129–70. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.qjmed.a067198
- Felsenfeld O. Borrelia: Strains, Vectors, Human and Animal Borreliosis. St. Louis: Warren H. Green; 1971.
- Southern PM, Sanford JP. RELAPSING FEVER: A Clinical and Microbiological Review. Medicine. 1969;48(2):129–50. 00005792-196903000-00002.
- Goubau PF. Relapsing fevers. A review. Ann Soc Belg Med Trop. 1984;64(4):335–64. WOS:A1984ABX2000002.
Supporting information
S1 Checklist. PRISMA Checklist.
Twenty-seven-item checklist for systematic reviews. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008564.s001
(DOC)
S1 Text. Review protocol.
Established to conduct this systematic review.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008564.s002
(DOCX)
S2 Text. Data extraction sheet.
Used for screening and selecting eligible publications.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008564.s003
(DOCX)
S3 Text. References.
Reference list of included and excluded publications.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008564.s004
(DOCX)
S1 Data. Data extracted from included studies.
Excel spreadsheet containing, in separate sheets, the underlying numerical data.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008564.s006
(XLSX)
References
- 1.
Hippocrates , Chadwick J, Mann WN. The Medical Works of Hippocrates. A new translation… by John Chadwick… and W.N. Mann. [With a portrait.]. Blackwell Scientific Publications: Oxford; 1950.
- 2.
Balthazard M. Relapsing fevers. In: National Academy of Sciences WDC, editor. Tropical Health; a Report on a Study of Needs and Resources1962. p. 497.
- 3. Craigie D. Notice of a febrile disorder which has prevailed at Edinburgh during the summer of 1843. Edinburgh Med Surg J 1843;60:410–8. pmid:30330635
- 4. Henderson W. On some of the characters which distinguish the fever at present epidemic from typhus fever. Edinburgh Med Surg J 1844;61:201–25. pmid:30330703
- 5. Greig EDW. An Epidemic of Relapsing Fever in Edinburgh In 1843. Edinb Med J 1943;50(11):681–6.
- 6. Obermeier O. Vorkommen feinster eine eigenbewegung zeigender faden im blute von rekurrenskranken. Zentralbl Med Wiss 1873;11:145–7.
- 7. Mackie FP. THE PART PLAYED BY PEDICULUS CORPORIS IN THE TRANSMISSION OF RELAPSING FEVER. Br Med J 1907;2(2450):1706–9. pmid:20763589; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2358735.
- 8. Doury P. Henry Foley and the discovery in 1908 of the role played by the louse in the transmission of relapsing fever. Hist Sci Med 1996;30(3):363–9. pmid:11624987.
- 9. Sergent EHF. Fièvre récurrente du Sud-Oranais et Pediculus vestimenti. Bull Soc Pathol Exot 1908;1:174.
- 10. Cutler SJ. Relapsing fever—a forgotten disease revealed. J Appl Microbiol. 2010;108(4):1115–22. pmid:19886891.
- 11.
Barbour AG. Relapsing Fever and other Borrelia Diseases. Tropical Infectious Diseases: Elsevier Inc.; 2011. p. 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-11-295 pmid:22035314
- 12. Chikeka I, Dumler JS. Neglected Bacterial Zoonoses. Clin Microbiol Infect 2015;21(5):404–15. pmid:25964152; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4466158.
- 13. Seilmaier M, Guggemos W, Wieser A, Fingerle V, Balzer L, Fenzl T, et al. 25 Cases of Louse-borne Relapsing Fever in Refugees from East Africa. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2016;141(14):E133–E42. CCC:000381007800002. pmid:27404939
- 14. Hytonen J, Khawaja T, Gronroos JO, Jalava A, Meri S, Oksi J. Louse-borne relapsing fever in Finland in two asylum seekers from Somalia. Apmis. 2017;125(1):59–62. pmid:27859692.
- 15. Grecchi C, Zanotti P, Pontarelli A, Chiari E, Tomasoni LR, Gulletta M, et al. Louse-borne relapsing fever in a refugee from Mali. Infection. 2017;45(3):373–6. pmid:28161771.
- 16. Osthoff M, Schibli A, Fadini D, Lardelli P, Goldenberger D. Louse-borne relapsing fever—report of four cases in Switzerland, June-December 2015. BMC Infect Dis. 2016;16(1) (no pagination)(210). pmid:27188655.
- 17. Darcis G, Hayette MP, Bontems S, Sauvage AS, Meuris C, Van Esbroeck M, et al. Louse-borne relapsing fever in a refugee from Somalia arriving in Belgium. J Travel Med. 2016;23(3). pmid:614260542.
- 18. Gaud M, Bey MK, Vaucel M. The Evolution of the Epidemic of Relapsing Fever, 1942–1946. Bull World Health Organ 1948;1(1):93–101. pmid:20603923; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2556134.
- 19. Gaud M, Morgan MT. Epidemiological Study on Relapsing Fever in North Africa (1943–1945). Bull World Health Organ 1948;1(1):69–92. pmid:20603922; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2556137.
- 20. Bryceson ADM, Parry EHO, Perine PL, Warrell DA, Vukotich D, Leithead CS. A clinical and laboratory study of 62 cases in ethiopia and a reconsideration of the literature. QJM 1970;39(1):129–70.
- 21. Elbir H, Raoult D, Drancourt M. Review article: Relapsing fever borreliae in Africa. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2013;89(2):288–92. pmid:23926141.
- 22. Goubau PF. Relapsing fevers. A review. Ann Soc Belg Med Trop. 1984;64(4):335–64. WOS:A1984ABX2000002. pmid:6397148
- 23. Rodhain F. BORRELIA AND RELAPSING FEVERS—TODAY EPIDEMIOLOGICAL FEATURES. Bulletin De L Institut Pasteur. 1976;74(2):173–218. WOS:A1976BL56300002.
- 24. Mooser H. DIE RUCKFALLFIEBER. Ergebnisse Der Mikrobiologie Immunitatsforschung Und Experimentellen Therapie. 1958;31:184–228. WOS:A1958WN23800004.
- 25.
Felsenfeld O. Borrelia: Strains, Vectors, Human and Animal Borreliosis. St. Louis: Warren H. Green; 1971.
- 26. Hindle E. Relapsing Fever: Some recent advances. Trop Dis Bull 1935;32:309.
- 27. Oliver MR, Liles WC, Spach DW. Relapsing fever. Wilderness Environ Med 1996;7(1):46–55. pmid:26116126.
- 28. Cutler SJ, Moss J, Fukunaga M, Wright DJM, Fekade D, Warrell D. Borrelia recurrentis characterization and comparison with relapsing- fever, Lyme-associated, and other Borrelia spp. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1997;47(4):958–68. pmid:9336893.
- 29. Brouqui P, Stein A, Dupont HT, Gallian P, Badiaga S, Rolain JM, et al. Ectoparasitism and vector-borne diseases in 930 homeless people from Marseilles. Medicine. 2005;84(1):61–8. pmid:15643300.
- 30. Raoult D, Birtles RJ, Montoya M, Perez E, Tissot-Dupont H, Roux V, et al. Survey of three bacterial louse-associated diseases among rural Andean communities in Peru: Prevalence of epidemic typhus, trench fever, and relapsing fever. Clin Infect Dis 1999;29(2):434–6. pmid:10476755.
- 31. Gebrehiwot T, Fiseha A. Tetracycline versus penicillin in the treatment of louse-borne relapsing fever. Ethiop Med J [Internet]. 1992; 30(3):[175–81 pp.]. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clcentral/articles/444/CN-00087444/frame.html. pmid:1396621
- 32. Hoch M, Wieser A, Loscher T, Margos G, Purner F, Zuhl J, et al. Louse-borne relapsing fever (Borrelia recurrentis) diagnosed in 15 refugees from northeast Africa: Epidemiology and preventive control measures, Bavaria, Germany, July to October 2015. Eurosurveillance. 2015;20(42). pmid:26538532.
- 33. Raoult D, Roux V. The body louse as a vector of reemerging human diseases. Clin Infect Dis 1999;29(4):888–911. pmid:10589908.
- 34. Porcella SF, Raffel SJ, Schrumpf ME, Schriefer ME, Dennis DT, Schwan TG. Serodiagnosis of louse-borne relapsing fever with glycerophosphodiester phosphodiesterase (GlpQ) from Borrelia recurrentis. J Clin Microbiol 2000;38(10):3561–71. pmid:11015364.
- 35. Felsenfeld O. The problem of relapsing fever in the Americas. IMS Ind Med Surg 1973;42(3):7–10. Epub 1973/03/01. pmid:4511068.
- 36. Southern PM, Sanford JP. RELAPSING FEVER: A Clinical and Microbiological Review. Medicine. 1969;48(2):129–50. 00005792-196903000-00002.
- 37. Cutler SJ, Rudenko N, Golovchenko M, Cramaro WJ, Kirpach J, Savic S, et al. Diagnosing Borreliosis. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 2017;17(1):2–11. pmid:28055580
- 38. Cadavid D, Barbour AG. Neuroborreliosis during relapsing fever: review of the clinical manifestations, pathology, and treatment of infections in humans and experimental animals. Clin Infect Dis 1998;26(1):151–64. Epub 1998/02/10. pmid:9455525.
- 39. Stott H. On Two Varieties of Relapsing Fever Spirochætal Infection in India. Ind Med Gaz 1911;46(8):292–8. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5171664. pmid:29005716
- 40. Warrell DA. Louse-borne relapsing fever (Borrelia recurrentis infection). Epidemiol Infect 2019;147:e106. pmid:30869050
- 41. Jiang J, Temenak JJ, Richards AL. Real-time PCR duplex assay for Rickettsia prowazekii and Borrelia recurrentis. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2003;990:302–10. pmid:12860643
- 42. Elbir H, Henry M, Diatta G, Mediannikov O, Sokhna C, Tall A, et al. Multiplex Real-Time PCR Diagnostic of Relapsing Fevers in Africa. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2013;7(1) (no pagination)(e2042). pmid:23390560.
- 43. Qi X, Yang M, Ren W, Jia J, Wang J, Han G, et al. Find Duplicates among the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library Databases in Systematic Review. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(8):e71838. PMC3748039. pmid:23977157
- 44. Perine PL, Reynolds DF. RELAPSING-FEVER EPIDEMIC IN THE SUDAN AND ETHIOPIA Lancet 1974;304(7892):1324–5.
- 45.
De Beer PAM. Louse-borne relapsing fever. Giulio Borgnolo et al. Trop Geogr Med 1993;45(2):66–9. Tropical and Geographical Medicine. 1994;46(3):192. pmid:24220492.
- 46. Ormsbee R, Peacock M, Philip R, Casper E, Plorde J, Gabre-Kidan T, et al. Serologic diagnosis of epidemic typhus fever. Am J Epidemiol 1977;105(3):261–71. Epub 1977/03/01. pmid:403761.
- 47. Amanzougaghene N, Akiana J, Mongo Ndombe G, Davoust B, Nsana NS, Parra HJ, et al. Head Lice of Pygmies Reveal the Presence of Relapsing Fever Borreliae in the Republic of Congo. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(12) (no pagination)(e0005142). pmid:27911894.
- 48. Boutellis A, Mediannikov O, Bilcha KD, Ali J, Campelo D, Barker SC, et al. Borrelia recurrentis in head lice, Ethiopia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2013;19(5):796–8. pmid:23648147.
- 49. Wolff BP. Asiatic relapsing fever; report of 134 cases treated with mapharsen*. Ann Intern Med 1946;24(2):203–16. pmid:21012794
- 50. Bolton BH, Anderson H, R K. Imported louse-borne relapsing fever -Ohio. Morbidity Mortality Weekly Rep. 1976.
- 51. Isacsohn M, Gondard G, Yaoul E, Gindacu A, Kadosh D, Greenberg Z. LOUSE-BORNE RELAPSING FEVER IN ETHIOPIAN IMMIGRANTS. Isr J Med Sci. 1985;21(8):710. BIOSIS:PREV198630047889.
- 52. Nitzan O, Blum A, Marva E, Katz A, Tzadok BS, Nachum-Biala Y, et al. Case report: Infectious diseases in pilgrims visiting the holy land. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;97(2):611–4. pmid:28722620.
- 53. Ravina A, Pêcher Y, Avril J. Typhus récurrente contracté à Paris. Bull et Mém Soc Med Hopt de Paris 1950;11–12:508–10.
- 54. Goldenberger D, Claas GJ, Bloch-Infanger C, Breidthardt T, Suter B, Martinez M, et al. Louse-borne relapsing fever (Borrelia Recurrentis) in an Eritrean refugee arriving in Switzerland, August 2015. Eurosurveillance. 2015;20(32). pmid:605710959.
- 55. Wilting KR, Stienstra Y, Sinha B, Braks M, Cornish D, Grundmann H. Louse-borne relapsing fever (Borrelia recurrentis) in asylum seekers from Eritrea, The Netherlands, July 2015. Eur Secur 2015;20(30):3. pmid:26250069.
- 56.
Hertting O, Bennet R, Luthander J, Eriksson M. Infection-related hospitalisations in refugee children-a one year study from Northern Stockholm. Cogent Medicine Conference: 8th Excellence in Pediatrics Conference. 2016;3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331205X.2016.1265203 pmid:614265435.
- 57. Colomba C, Scarlata F, Di Carlo P, Giammanco A, Fasciana T, Trizzino M, et al. Fourth case of louse-borne relapsing fever in Young Migrant, Sicily, Italy, December 2015 Mini Review Article. Public Health. 2016;139:(5p). pmid:27340042.
- 58. Ciervo A, Mancini F, Di Bernardo F, Giammanco A, Vitale G, Dones P, et al. Louseborne relapsing fever in young migrants, sicily, Italy, july-september 2015. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016;22(1):152–3. pmid:26690334.
- 59. Zammarchi L, Antonelli A, Bartolini L, Pecile P, Trotta M, Rogasi PG, et al. Louse-Borne Relapsing Fever with Meningeal Involvement in an Immigrant from Somalia to Italy, October 2015. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2016;16(5):352–5. pmid:26938933.
- 60. Lucchini A, Lipani F, Costa C, Scarvaglieri M, Balbiano R, Carosella S, et al. Louseborne relapsing fever among East African refugees, Italy, 2015. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016;22(2):298–301. pmid:26812354.
- 61. Antinori S, Mediannikov O, Corbellino M, Grande R, Parravicini C, Bestetti G, et al. Louse-Borne Relapsing Fever (Borrelia recurrentis) in a Somali Refugee Arriving in Italy: A Re-emerging Infection in Europe? PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(5) (no pagination)(e0004522). pmid:610558073.
- 62. Benz R, Majer S. Unexpected cause of high fever in the blood film. Blood. 2016;127(18):2264. pmid:28092876.
- 63. Von Both U, Alberer M. Borrelia recurrentis infection. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(5):e5. pmid:27518689.
- 64. Keller C, Zumblick M, Streubel K, Eickmann M, Muller D, Kerwat M, et al. Hemorrhagic diathesis in borrelia recurrentis infection imported to Germany. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016;22(5):917–9. pmid:27088458.
- 65. Costescu Strachinaru DI, Cambier J, Kandet-Yattara H, Konopnicki D. Relapsing fever in asylum seekers from Somalia arriving in Belgium in August 2015. Acta Clin Belg. 2016;71(5):353–5. pmid:27112219.
- 66. Bloch-Infanger C, Battig V, Kremo J, Widmer AF, Egli A, Bingisser R, et al. Increasing prevalence of infectious diseases in asylum seekers at a tertiary care hospital in Switzerland. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(6):e0179537. BIOSIS:PREV201700716182. pmid:28617860
- 67. Cutuli SL, De Pascale G, Spanu T, Dell’Anna AM, Bocci MG, Pallavicini F, et al. Lice, rodents, and many hopes: A rare disease in a young refugee. Crit Care. 2017;21(1) (no pagination)(81). pmid:615072527.
- 68. Jochum J, Tannich E, Tappe D, Schmiedel S. A Somali refugee with fever and abnormal blood smear. Internist 2017;58(3):287–92. pmid:27822621
- 69. Antinori S, Tonello C, Edouard S, Parravicini C, Gastaldi D, Grande R, et al. Diagnosis of louse-borne relapsing fever despite negative microscopy in two asylum seekers from Eastern Africa. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2017;97(6):1669–72. pmid:29016302
- 70. Fasciana T, Calà C, Colomba C, Mascarella C, Scarlata F, Capra G, et al. A new case of louse-borne relapsing fever in sicily: Case report and mini review. Pharmacology 2017;1(Special Issue):62–6.
- 71. Alberer M, Malinowski S, Sanftenberg L, Schelling J. Notifiable infectious diseases in refugees and asylum seekers: experience from a major reception center in Munich. Germany Infection 2018;46(3):375–83. pmid:29616458
- 72. Ed Prado. Datos para el estudio de tifus recurrente en el Perú. Cronica Med Lima. 1919;36:408.
- 73. Ed Prado. Estudio del tifus recurrente en el Perú. Ann Fac Med Lima. 1920;3:26–45 and 134–52.
- 74. Chiriboga JM. Primera descriptión del tifus recurrente en el Perú, particularmente observado en el Departemento de Huancavelica. Cronica Med Lima 1919;36:127–32.
- 75. Guerrero JM. Tratamiento de la fiebre recurrente por medio de la penicilina. Rev Facul de Med 1946;16:264–5.
- 76. Robertson RC. Relapsing Fever in Shanghai (First Report). Chin Med J (Engl) 1932;46(9):853–85.
- 77. F-Ta C. Deitrick S, Chung S-F. Relapsing Fever in Children. A Study of Twenty-Six Epidemic Cases. Nat Med J China 1931;17(2):224–32.
- 78. Meleney HE. RELAPSE PHENOMENA OF SPIRONEMA RECURRENTIS. J Exp Med 1928;48(1):65–82. pmid:19869472; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2131462.
- 79. Chang SL. Relapsing fever in Changsha. A report of 41 cases. Chin Med J (Engl) 1938;54:163–72.
- 80. Chung H-L. Studies on the Transmission of Relapsing Fever in North China. Preliminary Observations Chinese Medical Journal 1936;50(12):1723–34.
- 81.
Scott HH. A History of Tropical Medicine. Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Co.; 1942.
- 82. Jouveau-Dubreuil H. Etude clinique sur la fièvre récurrente du Setchouen (Chine occidentale). Bull Soc Pathol Exot 1920;13:38.
- 83. Cochran S. The Story of Hope Hospital*. Bull N Y Acad Med 1961;37(1):47–65. pmid:13694213; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1804639.
- 84. Jouveau-Dubreuil H. Formule leukocytaire et diminution des éosinophiles dans la fièvre récurrente. Bull Soc Pathol Exot 1919;12:621.
- 85. Toyoda H. Studien über die Recurrensspirochäten in Mandschurien. Archives of Experimental Medicine 1919;3:42.
- 86. Chung H-L, Wei Y-L. Studies on the Transmission of Relapsing Fever in North China II. Observations on the Mechanism of Transmission of Relapsing Fever in Man. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1938;s1-18(6):661–74.
- 87. Chung H-L. The Cerebrospinal Fluid of Patients suffering from the Chinese Strain of Relapsing Fever. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1938;31(6):625–34 pp.
- 88. Chung H-L, Chang FC. Relapsing Fever. Clinical and Statistical Study of 337 Cases. Chin Med J (Engl) 1939;55(1):6–33.
- 89. Chung HL. Presence of spirochetes in Urine and Prostatic Fluid of patients with Relapsing Fever. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1938;38:97–8.
- 90. Ludlow AI. Relapsing fever in Korea. Ohio State Med J 1943;39:1011–3.
- 91. Anderson TR, Zimmerman LE. RELAPSING FEVER IN KOREA—A CLINICOPATHOLOGIC STUDY OF 11 FATAL CASES WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO ASSOCIATION WITH SALMONELLA INFECTIONS. Am J Pathol. 1955;31(6):1083–109. WOS:A1955WD46500007. pmid:13268613
- 92. Zimmerman LE. Some Experiences with Enteric Diseases in Korea *†: Perforation of Paratyphoid Ulcers and Salmonella Septicemia Complicating Relapsing Fever. Am J Public Health Nations Health 1953;43(3):279–84. pmid:13030878; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1620059.
- 93. Legerton CW, Chambers WL. Spontaneous rupture of the spleen in relapsing fever. US Armed Forces Med J. 1950;1(1):88–90. MEDLINE:15404480. pmid:15404480
- 94. Hirschboeck MM. THE USE OF CHLORAMPHENICOL IN RELAPSING FEVER. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1954;3(4):712–3. WOS:A1954UY65900016. pmid:13180831
- 95. Harrison IB, Whittington RM. Antibiotics in the treatment of relapsing fever. US Armed Forces Med J. 1951;2(12):1859–62. MEDLINE:14884341. pmid:14884341
- 96. Hermant . Note sur la fièvre récurrente dans la province de Nghê-An. Bull Soc Med Chir Indochine 1912;3:427.
- 97. Mouzels P, Nguyen X. Note sur 373 cas du fièvre récurrente traités au Lazaret de Hanoi par le 606 au cours de l’année 1912 de 1er janvier au 1er juin. Bulletin de la Société Médico-Chirurgicale de l’Indochine 1912;3:427.
- 98. Millous . Les Epidémies Fébriles non classées et la Fièvre Récurrente dans le Thanh-hoa en 1910, 1911, et 1912. Bulletin de la Societe Medico-Chirurgicale de l’Indochine 1913;4(1):14–8.
- 99. Cragg FW. The epidemiology of relapsing fever in India. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1922;15(8):236–56.
- 100.
Carter HV. Spirillum fever: synonyms: famine or relapsing fever as seen in western India: Churchill, London; 1882. pmid:29419014
- 101. Walker EA. Spirillum Fever in India. The Indian Medical Gazette. 1905;40(8):320–. PMC5162931. pmid:29004755
- 102. McCowen WT. Bilious Typhus Relapsing Fever. Ind Med Gaz. 1906;41(10):387–96. Epub 1906/10/01. pmid:29006131; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5181027.
- 103. Ali M. Relapsing Fever *Paper read at the All-India Sub-Assistant Surgeons’ onference at Agra. Ind Med Gaz 1918;53(5):178–80. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5201680. pmid:29008637
- 104. Jukes AM. Preliminary note on some cases of Spirillar Fever in the Darjeeling district. Ind Med Gaz 1912;47:476–7. pmid:29005496
- 105. Roy SC. Relapsing Fever Epidemic in Seoni District (Central Provinces), February to May, 1920. Ind Med Gaz 1921;56(1):7–9. pmid:29007287
- 106. Mallannah S. Relapsing Fever in Raichur. Ind Med Gaz 1923;58(4):168. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5178439. pmid:29007834
- 107. Cunningham J, Fraser AGL. Further Observations on Indian Relapsing Fever. Part II. The Serology of Relapsing Fever in Human Beings. Indian J Med Res 1935;22(4):595–616.
- 108. Megaw JWD, Gupta JC. The Geographical Distribution of Some of the Diseases of India. Ind Med Gaz 1927;62(6):299–313. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5197588. pmid:29010568
- 109. Cunningham J. Serological Observations on Relapsing Fever in Madras. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1925;19(1 and 2):11–33.
- 110. Chakrabarty A. Relapsing Fever (Louse borne) in north-east Bengal. J Indian Med Assoc 1948;18:352–3.
- 111. Haider MJ, Zafar F, Khan KR. A SURVEY OF BORRELIA-RECURRENTIS IN HUMAN BLOOD IN KARACHI PAKISTAN. Karachi University Journal of Science. 1990;18(1–2):89–94. BIOSIS:PREV199293018028.
- 112. Senecal J, Ahmad A. Treatment of recurrent fever with penicillin. La semaine des hopitaux: organe fonde par l’Association d’enseignement medical des hopitaux de Paris 1950;26(35):1634–8. Epub 1950/05/10. pmid:15418271.
- 113. Willcox WH. Typhus and Relapsing Fever in Mesopotamia and Northern Persia 1. Proc R Soc Med. 1920;13(Med Sect):59–81. pmid:19981140; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2152263.
- 114. Sinton JA. Relapsing Fever at Meshed, North-East Persia Ind Med Gaz 1921;56(7):241–50. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5166278. pmid:29007220
- 115. Willcox PH. Louse-borne relapsing fever in Persia. Brit Med J 1948;1(4548):473. pmid:18902668.
- 116. Mackie FP. Disease in Mesopotamia. Bristol Med Chir J (1883). 1919;36(137):118–31. pmid:28897495; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5057828.
- 117. Fry AS. An Epidemic of Fifty-Four Cases of Relapsing Fever Observed in Birjand, East Persia Ind Med Gaz 1920;55(1):2–8. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5180769. pmid:29008260
- 118. Newcomb C. On an Outbreak of Relapsing Fever in Turkey in 1918. Ind Med Gaz 1920;55(6):208–17. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5180621. pmid:29008207
- 119. Bodman R, Steward I. Louse-borne relapsing fever in Persia. Brit Med J [Internet]. 1948; 4545:[291–3 pp.]. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clcentral/articles/384/CN-00608384/frame.html. pmid:18905239
- 120. Baltazard M, Pournaki R, Chabaud AG. Relapsing fevers caused by Ornithodoros. Bulletin de la Societe de pathologie exotique et de ses filiales 1954;47(4):589–97. Epub 1954/01/01. pmid:13230821.
- 121. Garnham PC, Davies CW. An epidemic of louse-borne relapsing fever in Kenya. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1947;41(1):141–70. pmid:20270461.
- 122. Sciotto CG, Lauer BA, White WL, Istre GR. Detection of Borrelia in acridine orange-stained blood smears by fluorescence microscopy. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1983;107(7):384–6. Epub 1983/07/01. pmid:6602602.
- 123. Cobey FC, Goldbarg SH, Levine RA, Patton CL. Short report: Detection of Borrelia (relapsing fever) in rural Ethiopia by means of the quantitative buffy coat technique. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2001;65(2):164–5. pmid:11508395.
- 124. Larsson C, Bergström S. A Novel and Simple Method for Laboratory Diagnosis of Relapsing Fever Borreliosis. Open Microbiol J 2008;2:10–2. pmid:19088905; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2593045.
- 125. Felsenfeld O. Borreliae, Human Relapsing Fever, and Parasite-Vector-Host Relationships. Bacteriol Rev 1965;29(1):46–74. pmid:14295985; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC441260.
- 126. Larsson C, Andersson M, Bergstrom S. Current issues in relapsing fever. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2009;22(5):443–9. CCC:000270052300004. pmid:19623064
- 127. Schwan TG, Schrumpf ME, Hinnebusch BJ, Anderson DE, Konkel ME. GlpQ: an antigen for serological discrimination between relapsing fever and Lyme borreliosis. J Clin Microbiol. 1996;34(10):2483–92. PMC229300. pmid:8880505
- 128. Magnarelli LA, Anderson JF, Johnson RC. Cross-reactivity in serological tests for Lyme disease and other spirochetal infections. J Infect Dis 1987;156(1):183–8. Epub 1987/07/01. pmid:3298452.
- 129. Ras NM, Lascola B, Postic D, Cutler SJ, Rodhain F, Baranton G, et al. Phylogenesis of relapsing fever Borrelia spp. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1996;46(4):859–65. Epub 1996/10/01. pmid:8863409.
- 130. Lescot M, Audic S, Robert C, Nguyen TT, Blanc G, Cutler SJ, et al. The genome of Borrelia recurrentis, the agent of deadly louse-borne relapsing fever, is a degraded subset of tick-borne Borrelia duttonii. PLoS Genet. 2008;4(9) (no pagination)(e1000185). pmid:18787695.
- 131. Elbir H, Gimenez G, Sokhna C, Bilcha KD, Ali J, Barker SC, et al. Multispacer sequence typing relapsing fever Borreliae in Africa[Erratum appears in PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012 Jun;6(6). Note: Haitham, Elbir [corrected to Elbir, Haitham]]. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(6):e1652. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0001652 pmid:22679518.
- 132. Toledo A, Anda P, Escudero R, Larsson C, Bergstrom S, Benach JL. Phylogenetic analysis of a virulent Borrelia species isolated from patients with relapsing fever. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(7):2484–9. Epub 2010/05/14. pmid:20463158; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2897527.
- 133. Sparrow H. Etude du foyer éthiopien de fièvre récurrente. Bull World Health Organ. 1958;19(4):673–710 4. pmid:13596890; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2537725.
- 134. Abdalla RE. Some studies on relapsing fever in the Sudan. J Trop Med Hyg 1969;72(5):125–8. pmid:5769209.
- 135.
Geigy R. 18—Relapsing Fevers A2—WEINMAN, DAVID. In: Ristic M, editor. The Pathogens, the Infections, and the Consequences: Academic Press; 1968. p. 175–216.
- 136. Barbour AG. Isolation and cultivation of Lyme disease spirochetes. Yale J Biol Med. 1984;57(4):521–5. Epub 1984/07/01. pmid:6393604; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2589996.
- 137. Cutler SJ, Fekade D, Hussein K, Knox KA, Melka A, Cann K, et al. Successful in-vitro cultivation of Borrelia recurrentis. Lancet 1994;343(8891):242. Epub 1994/01/22. pmid:7904703.
- 138. Larsson C, Lundqvist J, Van Rooijen N, Bergstrom S. A novel animal model of Borrelia recurrentis Louse-Borne relapsing fever borreliosis using immunodeficient mice. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2009;3(9) (no pagination)(E522). pmid:19787030.
- 139. Karimi Y, Hannoun C, Ardoin P, Ameli M, Mohallati HB. Sur le purpura hémorragique observé dans l’Azarbaidjan-Est de l’Iran. Med Mal Infect. 1976;6(10 PART 2):399–404.
- 140. Ahmed MAM, Wahab SMA, Malik MOA. Louse-borne relapsing fever in the Sudan. A historical review and a clinico-pathological study. Trop Geogr Med 1980;32(2):106–11. pmid:7423600.
- 141. Salih SY, Mustafa D, Abdel Wahab SM, Ahmed MA, Omer A. Louse-borne relapsing fever: I. A clinical and laboratory study of 363 cases in the Sudan. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1977;71(1):43–8. pmid:871032.
- 142. Rijkels DF, Author A, Correspondence A, Rijkels DF. Louse-borne relapsing fever in Ethiopia. Trop Geogr Med 1971;23(4):335–40. pmid:5173444
- 143. Orloski K, Tharmaphornpilas P, O’Leary D, Ryan M, Schriefer M, Shoo R, et al. Epidemic louse-borne relapsing fever, Rumbek County, Sudan, 1998–1999. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1999;61(3 SUPPL.):223–4. BIOSIS:PREV199900470785.
- 144. Sundnes KO, Haimanot AT. Epidemic of louse-borne relapsing fever in Ethiopia.[Erratum appears in Lancet 1994 Jan 22;334(8891):244]. Lancet 1993;342(8881):1213–5. pmid:7901534.
- 145. Borgnolo G, Hailu B, Chiabrera F. Louse-borne relapsing fever in Ethiopia. Lancet 1991;338(8770):827. pmid:1681201.
- 146. Bonilla DL, Durden LA, Eremeeva ME, Dasch GA. The Biology and Taxonomy of Head and Body Lice-Implications for Louse-Borne Disease Prevention. PLoS Pathog. 2013;9(11) (no pagination)(e1003724). pmid:24244157.
- 147. Kirk R. The non-transmission of abyssinian louse-borne relapsing fever by the tick ornithodorus savignyi and certain other blood-sucking arthropods. Ann Trop Med Parasitol 1938;32(4):357–65.
- 148. De Liberato C, Magliano A, Romiti F, Menegon M, Mancini F, Ciervo A, et al. Report of the human body louse (Pediculus humanus) from clothes sold in a market in central Italy. Parasit Vectors. 2019;12(1). pmid:31053177
- 149. Nicolle C, Blaizot L, Conseil E. Étiologie de la fièvre récurrente. Son mode de transmission par le pou Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Seances de l’Academie des Sciences 1912;154:1636.
- 150. Nicolle C, Blaizot L, Conseil E. Conditions de transmission de la fièvre récurrente par le pou. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Seances de l’Academie des Sciences 1912;155:481.
- 151. Sergent E, Foley H. Fièvre récurrente et ictère. Bull Soc Pathol Exot 1921;14:632.
- 152. Houhamdi L, Raoult D. Excretion of living Borrelia recurrentis in feces of infected human body lice. J Infect Dis. 2005;191(11):1898–906. pmid:15871124.
- 153. Atkey OPH. Relapsing Fever in the (Anglo-Egyptian) Sudan in 1930. Bulletin de l’Office International d’Hygiene Publique 1931;23(11):2000–6.
- 154. Böger A. Die latente Rekurrensinfektion und das Rekurrensrheumatoid. Münch Med Woch 1943;90:549.
- 155. Robinson P. Relapsing Fever in Addis Ababa. Br Med J 1942;2(4259):216–7. pmid:20784396; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2164011.
- 156. Cadavid D, Sondey M, Garcia E, L Lawson C. Residual Brain Infection in Relapsing-Fever Borreliosis. J Infect Dis 2006;193:1451–8. pmid:16619194
- 157. Larsson C, Andersson M, Pelkonen J, Guo BP, Nordstrand A, Bergström S. Persistent brain infection and disease reactivation in relapsing fever borreliosis. Microbes Infect 2006;8(8):2213–9. pmid:16782384
- 158. Heisch RB, Garnham PC. The transmission of Spirochaeta duttoni Novy & Knapp by Pediculus humanus corporis de Geer. Parasitology. 1948;38(4):247–52. pmid:18907587; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCSource: CLML. 4814:731d.
- 159. Ackermann N, Marosevic D, Hoermansdorfer S, Eberle U, Rieder G, Treis B, et al. Screening for infectious diseases among newly arrived asylum seekers, Bavaria, Germany, 2015. Eurosurveillance. 2018;23(10):2–12. WOS:000427079700001.
- 160. Brouqui P. Arthropod-borne diseases associated with political and social disorder. Annu Rev Entomol2011. p. 357–74. pmid:20822446
- 161. Barrau K, Brouqui P, Jean P, Lafay V, Tissot-Dupont H. D R. Poux de corps, patients sans domicie fixe: les risques infectieux actuels. Bull Epidemiol Hebd 2000;17:73–4.
- 162.
Brouqui P, Raoult D. Arthropod-borne diseases in homeless. In: Hechemy KE, Blanco JR, Silverman DJ, Raoult DA, Oteo JA, editors. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences2006. p. 223–35.
- 163. Badiaga S, Raoult D, Brouqui P. Preventing and Controlling Emerging and Reemerging Transmissible Diseases in the Homeless. Emerg Infect Dis 2008;14(9):1353–9. pmid:18760000; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2603102.
- 164. Leibler JH, Zakhour CM, Gadhoke P, Gaeta JM. Zoonotic and Vector-Borne Infections among Urban Homeless and Marginalized People in the United States and Europe, 1990–2014. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases. 2016;16(7):435–44. pmid:27159039.
- 165. Alfaifi AA, Masoodi I, Alzaidi O, Hussain S, Khurshid S, Sirwal IA. Spirocheatal shock syndrome. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2014;32(2):183–5. pmid:24713911.
- 166. Wieser A, Löscher T, Schunk M, Seilmaier M, Balzer L, Margos G, et al. Relapsing fever: An almost forgotten disease in focus again ORIGINAL (NON-ENGLISH) TITLE Rückfallfieber: Eine fast vergessene Erkrankung ist wieder aktuell. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2016;141(14):1009–13. pmid:27404930; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC27404930.
- 167. Aarsland SJ, Castellanos-Gonzalez A, Lockamy KP, Mulu-Droppers R, Mulu M, White AC, et al. Treatable Bacterial Infections Are Underrecognized Causes of Fever in Ethiopian Children. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2012;87(1):128–33. pmid:22764303; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3391037.