Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborrelios

For everything that is related to Lyme and/or Lymeland, but doesn't fit in the other forums. Speak your mind, connect, ask help, etc.
velvetmagnetta
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun 23 Feb 2014 22:47

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by velvetmagnetta » Sat 28 Mar 2015 2:51

X-member wrote:
Chronic or Late Lyme Neuroborreliosis: Analysis of Evidence Compared to Chronic or Late Neurosyphilis

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3551238/

A quote:

Importantly, the existence of late Lyme disease is approved by all official guidelines in the U.S., Canada and Europe. The terms “late” and “chronic” Lyme disease, as in syphilis, are synonymous and define tertiary Lyme disease. The use of “chronic” Lyme disease as a different entity is inaccurate and confusing.
At first, I was a bit irritated at this exercise of parsing out this "chronic" Vs."late" terminology. But now I see that it is extremely relevant and important and, really, is at the heart of the debate and the very center of the whole Lyme controversy. So thank you, X-member, for bringing it up - and keeping at it!


So, one question to ask would be: Are all late-Lyme infections chronic and incurable?


We really have 2 problems here: One is a late-Lyme infection that may or may not be possible to completely eradicate. And the other is the question of permanent (or temporary) brain (or nerve, spine, joint, etc.) damage. Or, of course, both of these issues may be happening at the same time.

This difference is really important to me due to my inability to take further antibiotics in such case that I may still be actively infected. Would you agree that these two possibilities would call for vastly different treatments from one another?



This next statement by X-member is a whole separate issue and should probably have its own thread:
I don't agree that a disseminted infection is the same thing as a late borrelia infection.
Does a late Lyme infection always indicate a disseminated infection? Whenever I see a picture of the classic bulls-eye rash, I always wonder why it is shaped that way? Why is it not a solid circle of inflammation radiating outward from the bite evenly in all directions? Why is there a center red spot surrounded by a ring of no inflammation that is then followed by another red ring of inflaming, reacting antibodies?


(I believe there has been some work on this question, but I can't remember or gather my thoughts about it coherently. I would greatly appreciate any info. I did find this picture -

https://ocimc.files.wordpress.com/2013/ ... hanism.jpg

It seems Salp15 prevents antibodies from binding to the spirochete along with some OspA and OspC switching. But then, this is a subject for yet another entire thread!)


How does this happen? And why does this happen? Does it somehow aid the spirochetes in their dissemination? If that is so, then you could say that as soon as the spirochetes enter the body, the infection is immediately disseminated. So, perhaps, all Lyme - acute and otherwise - can be considered a disseminated Lyme infection?

X-member
Posts: 9805
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 18:18

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by X-member » Sat 28 Mar 2015 15:08

velvetmagnetta wrote:
This next statement by X-member is a whole separate issue and should probably have its own thread:
I don't agree that a disseminted infection is the same thing as a late borrelia infection.

Does a late Lyme infection always indicate a disseminated infection? Whenever I see a picture of the classic bulls-eye rash, I always wonder why it is shaped that way? Why is it not a solid circle of inflammation radiating outward from the bite evenly in all directions? Why is there a center red spot surrounded by a ring of no inflammation that is then followed by another red ring of inflaming, reacting antibodies?
I give you ILADS/Burrascanos information about this:

http://www.borrelia-tbe.se/media/burrguide200810.pdf

Two quotes, Burrascano say:
EARLY DISSEMINATED: Milder symptoms present for less than one year....
LATE DISSEMINATED: present greater than one year, more severely ill patients....
One more quote:
A very important issue is the definition of “Chronic Lyme Disease”. Based on my clinical data and the latest
published information, I offer the following definition. To be said to have chronic LB*, these three criteria must be
present:

1. Illness present for at least one year (this is approximately when immune breakdown attains clinically
significant levels).
2. Have persistent major neurologic involvement (such as encephalitis/encephalopathy, meningitis, etc.)
or active arthritic manifestations (active synovitis).
3. Still have active infection with B. burgdorferi (Bb), regardless of prior antibiotic therapy (if any).

Chronic Lyme is an altogether different illness than earlier stages.......
* Chronic LB = Chronic Lyme borreliosis

X-member
Posts: 9805
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 18:18

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by X-member » Sat 28 Mar 2015 15:18

ChronicLyme19 wrote earlier:

Two quotes:
For the first 6-8 months of my illness, I would have considered my illness early or early disseminated, not late stage because my symptoms were not late stage.
I would have considered it chronic because I had had it for 8 months and had also failed a round of antibiotic treatment.
But this is not Burrascanos definition of chronic Lyme borreliosis (see the post above).

X-member
Posts: 9805
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 18:18

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by X-member » Sat 28 Mar 2015 15:32

velvetmagnetta wrote earlier:
So, one question to ask would be: Are all late-Lyme infections chronic and incurable?
Here is some information from German psysicians who know what chronic Lyme borrelioisis stands for:

http://www.borreliose-gesellschaft.de/T ... elines.pdf

A quote:
In the early stage, i. e. in the first 4 weeks after the start of infection, a failure rate of 10% is to be expected with antibiotic treatment*.

In the chronic forms*, it is significantly higher at up to 50%.
* They talk about the recommended treatment for those stages.

X-member
Posts: 9805
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 18:18

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by X-member » Sun 29 Mar 2015 17:34

A quote from another thread:
Terms that are used interchangeably:

Acute/early stage
Disseminated/late stage
Chronic/persistent - both meaning an active infection that has failed at least one round of antibiotic treatment
From Burrascanos information (posted earlier in this thread):
Chronic Lyme is an altogether different illness than earlier stages.......
Burrascano actually use two early stages (just like European physicians and CDC do), and he do not say that a disseminated infection is the same thing as a late infection, and he do not say that chronic Lyme borreliosis only stands for an active infection that has failed at least one round of antibiotic treatment.

And his definition of late (or chronic) Lyme borrreliosis is an active borrelia infection for more than 1 year.

Correct me if I am wrong!

X-member
Posts: 9805
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 18:18

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by X-member » Sun 29 Mar 2015 17:58

A treatment failure in an early stage can not be called a late (or chronic) borreliosis until the infection have become a late infection.

And when it is called a late infection is based on which definition of late Lyme borreliosis that is used by the physician.

Edit to add:

I have posted some information about this in the thread below:

Acute/early persistent Lyme borreliosis?

http://www.lymeneteurope.org/forum/view ... =11&t=5731

velvetmagnetta
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun 23 Feb 2014 22:47

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by velvetmagnetta » Sun 29 Mar 2015 21:03

You bring up some very important points that do need sorting, but I'm not sure if this is entirely possible because from what I've read the Lyme stages, like the Syphillis stages (I, II, III), are more of a construct or a convenience for the doctor, researcher, and patient than actual separate disease stages. Don't both the Lyme and Syphillis infections grow more steadily and seamlessly rather than in steps or stages?

X-member
Posts: 9805
Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 18:18

Re: Chronic (Lyme) neuroborreliosis = late (Lyme) neuroborre

Post by X-member » Sun 29 Mar 2015 21:08

velvetmagnetta wrote:
Don't both the Lyme and Syphillis infections grow more steadily and seamlessly rather than in steps or stages?
I think so too. :)

Post Reply