Analysis of the Results of Screening Serological Examination for Syphilis in Patients of a Multidisciplinary Children’s Hospital

Introduction. Currently, the clinical course of syphilis has changed, which leads to a decrease in the alertness of the population. Therefore, it is very important to conduct a screening serological examination of the population in order to detect and reduce the incidence of syphilis in a timely manner.

The aim of the study was to study the incidence of syphilis during a screening examination of patients and caregivers of a multidisciplinary children’s hospital.

Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis of the results of serological screening for syphilis of 9262 patients and child caregivers of the multidisciplinary children’s hospital of the Regional Children’s Clinical Hospital (Ekaterinburg, Russia), which includes the Regional Perinatal Center, from 1 January 2023 to 30 September 2024.

Results. In 2023, 2 cases of acute syphilis were detected in women hospitalized for child care, and in 2024, 1 in a pregnant woman who did not complain and considered themselves healthy and posed an epidemic danger to others and medical personnel. There were also 2 cases of early congenital syphilis in 2024.

Discussion. The presence of IgM to Treponema pallidum indicates a recently acquired disease (4–6 weeks after infection). The detection of IgG only in adult patients speaks in favor of a current now or a history of syphilis, and in newborns about the transmission of IgG from mother to child throu

Conclusion. The high sensitivity of treponemal tests used in screening studies reduces the likelihood of missing hidden forms of syphilis by enzyme immunoassay.

gh the transplacental barrier.

1. Castro A, Jost H, Cox D, Fakile Y, Kikkert S, Tun Y, et al. A comparison of the analytical level of agreement of nine treponemal assays for syphilis and possible implications for screening algorithm. BMJ Open. 2013; 3(9):e003347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003347. Erratum in: BMJ Open. 2013;3(12): e003347corr1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003347corr1.

2. Bagretsova IA, Sukharev AV, Barsukova IM. Syphilis in an emergency hospital: The state of the issue and unresolved problems. The Scientific Notes of the Pavlov University. 2018;25(4):39–47. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24884/1607-4181-2018-25-4-39-47.

3. Potekaev NN, Frigo NV, Dmitriev GA, Kitaeva NV, Dolya OV, Gushchin AE, et al. Laboratory diagnostics of syphilis. Modern approaches and perspectives. Part I. Epidemiology. Direct diagnostic methods. Russian Journal of Clinical Dermatology and Venereology. 2021;20(6):7–18. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/klinderma2021200617.

4. Gupta R, Vora RV. Congenital syphilis, still a reality. Indian Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases and AIDS. 2013;34(1):50–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7184.112941.

5. Forrestel AK, Kovarik CL, Katz KA. Sexually acquired syphilis: Laboratory diagnosis, management, and prevention. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2020;82(1):17–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.074.

6. Zhang RL, Zhang JP, Wang QQ. Recombinant Treponema pallidum protein Tp0965 activates endothelial cells and increases the permeability of endothelial cell monolayer. PloS One. 2014;9(12):e115134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115134.

7. Wende RD, Mudd RL, Know JM, Holder WR. The VDRL slide test in 322 cases of darkfield positive primary syphilis. South Medical Journal. 1971;64(5):633–634. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007611-19710500000030.

8. Lee K, Park H, Roh EY, Shin S, Park KU, Park MH, et al. Characterization of sera with discordant results from reverse sequence screening for syphilis. BioMed Research International. 2013;2013:269347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/269347.

9. Brautigam CA, Deka RK, Liu WZ, Norgard MV. The Tp0684 (MglB-2) lipoprotein of Treponema pallidum: A glucose-binding protein with divergent topology. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0161022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161022.

10. Rosanna WP, David M, Kamb ML, Chen XS, Radolf JD, Benzaken AS. Syphilis. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2017;12(3):17073. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2017.73.

11. Janier M, Unemo M, Dupin N, Tiplica GS, Potocnik M, Patel R. European guideline on the management of syphilis. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. 2020;35(3):574–588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.16946.

12. Sanfilippo AM, Freeman K, Schmitz JL. Comparison of manual and fully automated AIX1000 rapid plasma reagin assays for laboratory diagnosis of syphilis. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2018;56(8):e00214-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00214-18.

13. Bromberg K, Rawstron S, Tannis GJ. Diagnosis of congenital syphilis by combining Treponema pallidum-specific IgM detection with immunofluorescent antigen detection for T. pallidum. The Journal of Infectious Diseases. 1993;168(1):238–242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/168.1.238.

14. Rawstron SA, Mehta S, Bromberg K. Evaluation of a Treponema pallidum-specific IgM enzyme immunoassay and Treponema pallidum western blot antibody detection in the diagnosis of maternal and congenital syphilis. Journal of Sex Transition Diseases. 2004;31(2):123–126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.OLQ.0000109941.60065.65.

15. Sánchez PJ, Wendel GD, Grimprel E, Goldberg M, Hall M, Arencibia-Mireles O, et al. Evaluation of molecular methodologies and rabbit infectivity testing for the diagnosis of congenital syphilis and neonatal central nervous system invasion by Treponema pallidum. The Journal of Infectious Diseases. 1993;167(1):148–157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/167.1.148.

16. Serwin AB, Chodynicka B. Diagnostyka serologiczna kiły — aktualne problemy i kontrowersje [Serological diagnosis of syphilis — current problems and controversies]. Przegląd Epidemiology. 2009;63(4):519–523. PMID: https://pubmed.gov/20120950.

17. Young H. Syphilis. Serology. Dermatological Clinics. 1998;16(4):691–698. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s07338635(05)70034-6.

18. Spiteri G, Unemo M, Mårdh O, Amato-Gauci AJ. The resurgence of syphilis in high-income countries in the 2000s: A focus on Europe. Epidemiology and Infection. 2019;147:e143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268819000281.

19. Onesimo R, Buonsenso D, Gioè C, Valetini P. Congenital syphilis: Remember to not forget. BMJ Case Reports. 2012;2012: bcr0120125597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr.01.2012.5597.

20. Arriagada D, Donoso A, Cruces P, Díaz F. Congenital syphilis: Presenting as septic shock alter the neonatal period. Revista Chilena de Infectología. 2012;29(5):558–563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S071610182012000600017.

21. Matyskina NV, Taranushenko TE. Early congenital syphilis: Solved and unresolved problems of diagnosis. Russian Bulletin of Perinatology and Pediatrics. 2019;64:(2):75–80 (In Russ). DOI: https://doi.org/10.21508/1027-4065-2019-64-2-75-80.

22. Dmitriev GA, Frigo NV, Negasheva ES, Kitaeva NV, Dolya OV. New approaches to laboratory diagnosis of neurosyphilis. Russian Journal of Clinical Dermatology and Venereology. 2022;21(2):166–172. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/klinderma202221021166.

23. Geisler WM. The prozone phenomenon in syphilis testing. South Medical Journal. 2004;97(4):327–328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.SMJ.0000092571.52330.13.

24. Liu LL, Lin LR, Tong ML, Zhang HL, Huang SJ, Chen YY, et al. Incidence and risk factors for the prozone phenomenon in serologic testing for syphilis in a large cohort. Clinical Infection Diseases. 2014;59(3):384–389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciu325.

25. Potekaev NN, Frigo NV, Dmitriev GA, Kitaeva NV, Dolya OV, Gushchin AE, et al. Laboratory diagnosis of syphilis. Current approaches and perspectives. Part II. Indirect (serological) diagnostic methods. Russian Journal of Clinical Dermatology and Venereology. 2022;21(3):271–280. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/klinderma202221031271.