MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.7759/cureus.40440

Медицинская библиотека · Cureus · 2023

Tick-Borne Myopericarditis With Positive Anaplasma, Lyme, and Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) Serology: A Case Report.

Arshad Hassaan, Oudah Bashar, Mousa Aliaa, Kakhktsyan Tigran, Abu-Abaa Mohammad, Agarwal Ashish

Клинический случайСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

Myopericarditis has been reported only rarely in those with anaplasmosis and is typically difficult to diagnose. Lyme carditis can also be difficult to diagnose as it is relatively rare but potentially fatal and usually has nonspecific manifestations. We are presenting a 61-year-old male patient who presented in New Jersey, United States with unremitting fever, chills, and myalgia for two weeks along with nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Investigations were suggestive of perimyocarditis as was indicated by diffuse ST segment elevation on electrocardiography (EKG) with the presence of small pericardial effusion on echocardiography. A mild troponin leakage was also seen. This progressed to septic shock that required vasopressor therapy. Further history-taking revealed recent tick exposure and prompted empirical initiation of doxycycline. This proved to be successful with fever defervescence and clinical improvement. Serological tests confirmed both acute Lyme and anaplasma infections along with positive serology of Epstein Barr virus (EBV). This case highlights an uncommon presentation of carditis in acute Lyme and anaplasma infections with the associated false-positive serology of EBV.

Для цитирования: Arshad Hassaan, Oudah Bashar, Mousa Aliaa, Kakhktsyan Tigran, Abu-Abaa Mohammad, Agarwal Ashish. Tick-Borne Myopericarditis With Positive Anaplasma, Lyme, and Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) Serology: A Case Report.. Cureus. 2023. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.40440.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.