Congenital syphilis laboratory findings: Difference between revisions
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
===Dark Microscopic Examination=== | ===Dark Microscopic Examination=== | ||
Darkfield microscopic examination or DFA staining of suspicious lesions or body fluids (e.g., nasal discharge) also should be performed. | |||
==References== | ==References== |
Revision as of 14:31, 21 December 2012
Please help WikiDoc by adding more content here. It's easy! Click here to learn about editing.
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Kalsang Dolma, M.B.B.S.[2]
Congenital syphilis Microchapters |
Diagnosis |
Treatment |
Case Studies |
Congenital syphilis laboratory findings On the Web |
American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Congenital syphilis laboratory findings |
Risk calculators and risk factors for Congenital syphilis laboratory findings |
Laboratory Findings
- Blood tests
- Complete blood count
- Differential count
- Platelet count
- CSF analysis
- VDRL tests
- Cell counts
- Protein
Serology
The diagnosis of congenital syphilis is complicated by the transplacental transfer of maternal nontreponemal and tre-ponemal IgG antibodies to the fetus. This transfer of antibodies makes the interpretation of reactive serologic tests for syphilis in infants difficult.
All infants born to mothers who have reactive nontreponemal and treponemal test results should be evaluated with a quantitative nontreponemal serologic test (RPR or VDRL) performed on infant serum because umbilical cord blood can become contaminated with maternal blood and could yield a false-positive result. Conducting a treponemal test (i.e., TP-PA or FTA-ABS) on a newborn’s serum is not necessary. No commercially available immunoglobulin (IgM) test can be recommended.
Dark Microscopic Examination
Darkfield microscopic examination or DFA staining of suspicious lesions or body fluids (e.g., nasal discharge) also should be performed.