AEDV Expert Consensus for the Management of Syphilis. / Documento de expertos de la AEDV para el manejo de la sífilis.

Syphilis -the "great simulator" for classical venereologists-is re-emerging in Western countries despite adequate treatment; several contributing factors have been identified, including changes in sexual behaviour, which won't be the topic of this article though. In 2021, a total of 6613 new cases of syphilis were reported in Spain, representing an incidence of 13.9×100 000 inhabitants (90.5%, men). Rates have increased progressively since 2000. The clinical presentation of syphilis is heterogeneous. Although chancroid, syphilitic roseola and syphilitic nails are typical lesions, other forms of the disease can be present such as non-ulcerative primary lesions like Follmann balanitis, chancres in the oral cavity, patchy secondary lingual lesions, or enanthema on the palate and uvula, among many others. Regarding diagnosis, molecular assays such as PCR have been replacing dark-field microscopy in ulcerative lesions while automated treponemal tests (EIA, CLIA) are being used in serological tests, along with classical tests (such as RPR and HAART) for confirmation and follow-up purposes. The interpretation of these tests should be assessed in the epidemiological and clinical context of the patient. HIV serology and STI screening should be requested for anyone with syphilis. Follow-up of patients under treatment is important to ensure healing and detect reinfection. Serological response to treatment should be assessed with the same non-treponemal test (RPR/VDRL); 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up is a common practice in people living with HIV (PLHIV). Sexual contacts should be assessed and treated as appropriate. Screening is advised for pregnant women within the first trimester of pregnancy. Pregnant women with an abortion after week 20 should all be tested for syphilis. The treatment of choice for all forms of syphilis, including pregnant women and PLHIV, is penicillin. Macrolides are ill-advised because of potential resistance.

¿Sigue siendo útil la microscopia de campo oscuro en el diagnóstico de la sífilis primaria en el siglo XXI? / Is dark-field microscopy still useful for the primary syphilis diagnosis in the 21ST century?

IntroducciónLa serología luética en la sífilis primaria puede ser negativa los primeros 5-15 días. El objetivo de este trabajo fue evaluar los beneficios de incluir la microscopia de campo oscuro (MCO) en el algoritmo diagnóstico de la sífilis primaria.MetodologíaSe incluyó a todos los pacientes que acudieron a una clínica de infecciones de transmisión sexual de la Comunidad de Madrid entre 2015 y 2019 que presentaban una úlcera genital sospechosa de sífilis primaria. Se les realizó MCO y serología (EIA/TPPA/RPR).ResultadosDe las 806 muestras, el 53,2% (429) fueron positivas para MCO. De los 429, el 48% presentaba screening serológico negativo (EIA/RPR) y de ellos en el 77,6% el TPPA fue positivo.ConclusionesLa MCO permite un diagnóstico de sífilis primaria precoz, incluso sin confirmación serológica. Si no se dispone de técnicas directas, en primoinfección, la TPPA es de gran ayuda en el diagnóstico.

IntroductionSerological test for primary syphilis could be negative the first 5-15 days. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of including dark field microscopy (DFM) in the diagnosis algorythm for primary syphilis.Materials/methodsPatients attended to a sexual transmission diseases clinic of Madrid, from 2015 to 2019, for a genital ulcer with clinical suspicion of primary syphilis. They were tested for DMF and serological test (EIA/TPPA/RPR).ResultsOver the total amount of samples (806), 53.2% (429) were positive for DFM. Thus, the 48% of the 429 patients had negative serological test (EIA/RPR) of which the 77.6% were positive at TPPA.ConclusionsDFM allows primary syphilis early diagnosis, even without serological test. If no direct detection methods are available, for patients without history of syphilis, TPPA could help to diagnose primary syphilis.

Is dark-field microscopy still useful for the primary syphilis diagnosis in the 21ST century?

INTRODUCTION: Serological test for primary syphilis could be negative the first 5-15 days. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of including dark field microscopy (DFM) in the diagnosis algorythm for primary syphilis. MATERIALS/METHODS: Patients attended to a sexual transmission diseases clinic of Madrid, from 2015 to 2019, for a genital ulcer with clinical suspicion of primary syphilis. They were tested for DMF and serological test (EIA/TPPA/RPR). RESULTS: Over the total amount of samples (806), 53.2% (429) were positive for DFM. Thus, the 48% of the 429 patients had negative serological test (EIA/RPR) of which the 77.6% were positive at TPPA. CONCLUSIONS: DFM allows primary syphilis early diagnosis, even without serological test. If no direct detection methods are available, for patients without history of syphilis, TPPA could help to diagnose primary syphilis.

Is dark-field microscopy still useful for the primary syphilis diagnosis in the 21ST century? / ¿Sigue siendo útil la microscopia de campo oscuro en el diagnóstico de la sífilis primaria en el siglo XXI?

INTRODUCTION: Serological test for primary syphilis could be negative the first 5-15 days. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of including dark field microscopy (DFM) in the diagnosis algorythm for primary syphilis. MATERIALS/METHODS: Patients attended to a sexual transmission diseases clinic of Madrid, from 2015 to 2019, for a genital ulcer with clinical suspicion of primary syphilis. They were tested for DMF and serological test (EIA/TPPA/RPR). RESULTS: Over the total amount of samples (806), 53.2% (429) were positive for DFM. Thus, the 48% of the 429 patients had negative serological test (EIA/RPR) of which the 77.6% were positive at TPPA. CONCLUSIONS: DFM allows primary syphilis early diagnosis, even without serological test. If no direct detection methods are available, for patients without history of syphilis, TPPA could help to diagnose primary syphilis.

Tumor rectal como presentación de sífilis primaria: presentación de caso / A rectal tumor as primary syphilis presentation: a study case

Se presenta el caso de un paciente masculino de 65 años, que acude a la guardia refiriendo dolor anal reciente. Al examen físico presenta una fisura anal crónica en la comisura posterior y al tacto rectal se palpa una masa ubicada sobre el anillo anorectal. La video colonoscopía identifica una lesión de aspecto neoplásico. La biopsia señala inflamación crónica leve. La resonancia magnética pelviana informa compromiso tumoral infiltrativo transmural del recto inferior. La biopsia de la zona evidencia espiroquetas. La serología es positiva para sífilis (+ Sífilis). Luego del tratamiento indicado el paciente evoluciona satisfactoriamente.

A 65 years old male patient appeared at the emergency service referring recent anal pain. The physical examination shows a chronic anal fissure in the posterior corner and the rectal examination shows a mass on the anorectal ring. Video colonoscopy identifies a lesion with a neoplasic aspect. The biopsy shows mild chronic inflammation. The MRI of the pelvis informs transmural infiltrative tumoral compromise of the lower rectum. The biopsy of the area presents spirochetes. Serology is positive for syphilis (+ Syphilis). After the indicated treatment, the patient evolves satisfactorily.