Some laboratories recommend and advertise assessing ticks by PCR for borrelial genomic sequences when they have been removed from the skin of a human host. Laboratories report the presence of borrelia, sometimes also the genotype and the number of copies. In case of a positive result, these laboratories recommend either antibiotic prophylaxis or serological assessment immediately and a few weeks later to detect seroconversion.
There are no convincing data, justifying the use of these tests in ticks removed from humans or patients. There are no data presented for false positive results. It is not known why the number of copies is relevant, since the minimal infectious dose of
B.
burgdorferi is not known [
6]. If the genotype is not indicated, nonpathogenic genotypes may be included under the general term
B.
burgdorferi sensu lato, thus exaggerating the potential risk of transmission. In a study from Switzerland, a positive test result finding borrelia in removed ticks was not associated with the development of Lyme borreliosis [
19].
The assessment of ticks for borrelial genomic sequences overestimates the importance of a single tick bite, since most tick bites are not recognized by the host, and most patients with Lyme borreliosis do not remember having been bitten by a tick [
11]. When people recognize a tick on their skin and remove it early (i.e., within 24 h), most of the time, borrelia is not transmitted [
30]. The risk of transmission after a tick bite is given as 4 % [
8]. In a Swiss study, seroconversion occurred in 4.5 % of tick bites [
18]. Most infections take an uneventful course without clinical manifestations [
19]. Asymptomatic seroconversion and clinical infection are low in spite of a high percentage of infection by
B.
burgdorferi in ticks removed from these humans [
11]. Up to 5 % of healthy blood donors display IgG antibodies against
B.
burgdorferi [
1]; healthy forest workers, up to 52 % [
20]. In German children, this rate currently is 4.8 % [
22]. The apparently low transmission rate and the high proportion of asymptomatic borrelia infections after tick bites do not justify the search for borrelial genomic sequences in a removed tick. In addition, a positive result does not allow a reasonable conclusion: prophylactic antibiotic treatment after a tick bite is not recommended in Europe the more so as this treatment may not prevent infection followed by clinical manifestations [
17]. Even if seroconversion is detected after a tick bite, found in paired serum assessments at an interval of 3–4 weeks, this finding is without consequences in the absence of clinical manifestation, since antibiotic treatment would only be recommended if the patient gets sick with borreliosis. In conclusion, the assessment of borrelial sequences or antigens in ticks removed from patients is without therapeutic consequence, and therefore, the test should not be performed [
10].