Trench fever

The disease is classically a five-day fever of the relapsing type, rarely exhibiting a continuous course. The incubation period is relatively long, at about two weeks. The onset of symptoms is usually sudden, with high fever, severe headache, pain on moving the eyeballs, soreness of the muscles of the legs and back, and frequent hyperaesthesia of the shins. The initial fever is usually followed in a few days by a single, short rise but there may be many relapses between periods without fever. The most constant symptom is pain in the legs. Trench fever episodes may involve loss of appetite, shin pain or tenderness, and spleen enlargement. Generally, one to five periodic episodes of fever occur, separated by four-to-six-day-long asymptomatic periods.{{cite web |title=Facts about Bartonella quintana infection ('trench fever') |url=https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/bartonella-quintana-infection-trench-fever/facts |website=European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control |date=17 June 2017 |language=en}} Recovery takes a month or more. Lethal cases are rare, but in a few cases "the persistent fever might lead to heart failure". Aftereffects may include neurasthenia, cardiac disturbances, and myalgia.

The disease is caused by the bacterium Bartonella quintana (older names: Rochalimea quintana, Rickettsia quintana), found in the stomach walls of the body louse. Bartonella quintana is closely related to Bartonella henselae, the agent of cat scratch fever and bacillary angiomatosis.

Bartonella quintana is transmitted by contamination of a skin abrasion or louse-bite wound with the faeces of an infected body louse (Pediculus humanus corporis). There have also been reports of an infected louse bite passing on the infection.{{Cite book |last=Edward Rhodes Stitt |title=The Diagnostics and treatment of tropical diseases |publisher=P. Blakiston's Son & Co. |year=1922}}

B. quintana infection has also been noted in transplant recipients from infected donors.{{Cite news |last=Beeson |first=Amy M. |last2=Rich |first2=Shannan N. |last3=Russo |first3=Michael E. |last4=Bhatnagar |first4=Julu |last5=Kumar |first5=Rebecca N. |last6=Ritter |first6=Jana M. |last7=Annambhotla |first7=Pallavi |last8=Takeda |first8=Moe R. |last9=Kuhn |first9=Kira F. |title=Bartonella quintana Infection in Kidney Transplant Recipients from Donor Experiencing Homelessness, United States, 2022 - Volume 30, Number 12—December 2024 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC |url=https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/30/12/24-0310_article |access-date=2024-11-27 |language=en-us |doi=10.3201/eid3012.240310}}

Bartonella quintana diagnosis based on clinical recognition is typically obtained using microbiologic cultures, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) identification, and serological tests.

It is difficult to culture B. quintana because it is a slow-growing fastidious bacterium with complex nutritional needs and slow growth rates, often requiring specialized culture conditions. In cases with high likelihood of disease, cultures may be obtained using Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) bottles or Chocolate agar under 5% CO2 incubated at 35oC and held for at least 21 days.

Due to its slow growth rate, other molecular diagnosis methods can be utilized such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), to detect B. quintana DNA in samples of blood or tissue. According to Zeaiter et. al., “species-specific reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT PCR) was compared to serology” and helped diagnose all three Bartonella species (Okorji O et al., 2025).

B. quintana may be diagnosed by serology or the detection of antibodies against Bartonella bacteria in blood serum. Antibodies to B. quintana can be measured with indirect fluorescence assay (IFA) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Serology tests can be helpful in identifying current and past exposures to Bartonella species. Using serology, acute infections can be differentiated from chronic infections based on higher elevations of anti-Bartonella antibodies in those acute infections (Okorji O et al., 2025). Serology has been recorded to be most sensitive in cases with endocarditis (infection of the inner lining of the heart chambers and valves).

The treatment of trench fever can vary from case to case, as the human body has the ability to rid itself of the disease without medical intervention.{{Cite journal |last1=Rolain |first1=J. M. |last2=Brouqui |first2=P. |last3=Koehler |first3=J. E. |last4=Maguina |first4=C. |last5=Dolan |first5=M. J. |last6=Raoult |first6=D. |date=June 2004 |title=Recommendations for Treatment of Human Infections Caused by Bartonella Species |journal=Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy |volume=48 |issue=6 |pages=1921–1933 |doi=10.1128/AAC.48.6.1921-1933.2004 |issn=0066-4804 |pmc=415619 |pmid=15155180}} Some patients will require treatment, and others will not. For those who do require treatment, the best treatment comes by way of doxycycline in combination with gentamicin. Chloramphenicol is an alternative medication recommended under circumstances that render the use of tetracycline derivates undesirable, such as severe liver disease, kidney dysfunction, in children under nine years and in pregnant women. The medication is administered for seven to ten days.{{citation needed|date=May 2021}}

Treatment usually consists of a 4- to 6-week course of doxycycline as first-line, or erythromycin, or azithromycin.{{cite journal |pages=1587–93 |doi=10.1056/NEJM199012063232303 |title=A Newly Recognized Fastidious Gram-negative Pathogen as a Cause of Fever and Bacteremia |year=1990 |last1=Slater |first1=Leonard N. |last2=Welch |first2=David F. |last3=Hensel |first3=Diane |last4=Coody |first4=Danese W. |journal=New England Journal of Medicine |volume=323 |issue=23 |pmid=2233947|doi-access=free }}{{cite journal |pmid=6742814 |year=1984 |last1=Myers |first1=WF |last2=Grossman |first2=DM |last3=Wisseman Jr |first3=CL |title=Antibiotic susceptibility patterns in Rochalimaea quintana, the agent of trench fever |volume=25 |issue=6 |pages=690–3 |pmc=185624 |journal=Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy |doi=10.1128/aac.25.6.690}}

Trench fever is a vector-borne disease in which humans are primarily the main hosts. The vector through which the disease is typically transmitted is referred to as the human body louse Pediculus humanus humanus. The British Expeditionary Force Pyrexia of Unknown Origin Enquiry Sub-Committee concluded that the specific means by which the vector infected the host was louse waste entering the body through abraded skin.{{Cite web |title=Trench Fever in the First World War |url=https://www.kumc.edu/school-of-medicine/academics/departments/history-and-philosophy-of-medicine/archives/wwi/essays/medicine/trench-fever.html |access-date=2021-11-11 |website=www.kumc.edu |language=en-us}} Although the disease is typically found in humans, the gram-negative bacterium which induces the disease has been seen in mammals such as dogs, cats, and macaques in small numbers.{{Cite web |title=Facts about Bartonella quintana infection ('trench fever') |url=https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/bartonella-quintana-infection-trench-fever/facts |access-date=2021-11-11 |website=European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control |date=17 June 2017 |language=en}}

Since the vector of the disease is a human body louse, the main risk factors for infection are mostly in relation to contracting body louse. Specifically, some risk factors include body louse infestation, overcrowded and unhygienic conditions, body hygiene, war, famine, malnutrition, alcoholism, homelessness, and intravenous drug abuse.{{Cite web |date=2021-10-21 |title=Trench Fever: Practice Essentials, Background, Pathophysiology |url=https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/230294-overview#a5}}

The identified risk factors directly correlate with the subpopulations of identified infected persons throughout the duration of the known disease. Historically, trench fever was found in young male soldiers of World War I, whereas in the 21st century the disease mostly has a prevalence in middle-aged homeless men.

In a 2021 outbreak investigation in Denver, Colorado, 15% of the 241 tested homeless persons were positive.{{Cite web |date=2021-05-22 |title=People experiencing homelessness face 'substantial risk' for trench fever |url=https://www.healio.com/news/infectious-disease/20210521/people-experiencing-homelessness-face-substantial-risk-for-trench-fever |access-date=2021-12-02 |website=www.healio.com |language=en}} A 2012 study in Marseille, France had found the bacterium in 5.4% of the 930 homeless individuals they tested.{{Cite journal |last1=Badiaga |first1=S. |last2=Brouqui |first2=P. |date=2012-04-01 |title=Human louse-transmitted infectious diseases |journal=Clinical Microbiology and Infection |language=en |volume=18 |issue=4 |pages=332–337 |doi=10.1111/j.1469-0691.2012.03778.x |issn=1198-743X |pmid=22360386|doi-access=free }}

Trench fever affected armies in Flanders, France, Poland, Galicia, Italy, Macedonia, Mesopotamia, Russia and Egypt in World War I.{{Cite book |first=Justina Hamilton |title=Silent Enemies: The Story of the Diseases of War and Their Control |publisher=G. P. Putnam's Sons |year=1942 |last=Hill}}{{Cite book |last1=Timoney |first1=Francis |title=Hagan and Bruner's Microbiology and Infectious Diseases of Domestic Animals |last2=William Arthur Hagan |publisher=Cornell University Press |year=1973}} Three noted cases during WWI were the authors J. R. R. Tolkien,{{Cite book |last=Garth |first=John |title=Tolkien and the Great War: The Threshold of Middle-earth |publisher=HarperCollins Publishers |year=2003 |author-link=John Garth (author)}} A. A. Milne,{{Cite book |last1=Carpenter |first1=Humphrey |url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00carp |title=The Oxford companion to children's literature |last2=Mari Prichard |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1984 |isbn=9780192115829 |page=[https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00carp/page/351 351] |url-access=registration}} and C. S. Lewis.{{Cite book |last=Lewis |first=C. S. |title=Surprised By Joy |publisher=Harcourt |year=1955}}

Trench fever was first described and reported by British major John Graham in June 1915. He reported symptoms such as dizziness, headaches, and pain in the shins and back. The disease was most common in the military and consequently took much longer to identify than usual. These cases were originally confused for dengue, sandfly, or paratyphoid fever. Because insects were the suspected vector of transmission, Alexander Peacock published a study of the body louse in 1916. Due in part to his findings, the louse was determined to be the primary cause of transmission by many, but this was still contested by multiple voices in the field such as John Muir who believed the disease was of a viral nature. In 1917, the Trench Fever Investigation Commission (TFIC) had its first meeting. The TFIC performed experiments with infected blood and louse and learned much about the disease and louse behavior. Also in 1917, the American Red Cross started the Medical Research Committee (MRC). The MRC performed human experiments on trench fever, and their research was published in March 1918.{{Cite journal |last=Anstead |first=Gregory M |date=2016-08-01 |title=The centenary of the discovery of trench fever, an emerging infectious disease of World War 1 |journal=The Lancet Infectious Diseases |language=en |volume=16 |issue=8 |pages=e164–e172 |doi=10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30003-2 |issn=1473-3099 |pmc=7106389 |pmid=27375211}} The MRC and TFIC findings were very similar essentially confirming the louse as the vector of transmission, the TFIC correctly implicating louse fecal contamination as the mode of transmission rather than directly through louse bite.

The TFIC speculated that the disease was "likely" related to a rickettsial infection based on studies of infected lice, and the bacterium had been named by Schmincke one year prior in 1917.{{cite journal|last1=Brouqui|first1=P.|last2=Raoult|first2=D.|title=Bartonella quintana invades and multiplies within endothelial cells in vitro and in vivo and forms intracellular blebs|journal=Research in Microbiology|volume=147|issue=9|pages=719-731|doi=10.1016/S0923-2508(97)85119-4|doi-access=free|pmid=9296106|year=1996}}{{cite journal|last=Flamm|first=Heinz|title=Das Fleckfieber und die Erfindung seiner Serodiagnose und Impugn bee Der k. u. k. Armee I'm Ersten Weltkrieg|journal=Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift|volume=165|year=2015|pages=152-163|doi=10.1007/s10354-014-0332-7|trans-title=Spotted fever and the invention of its serodiagnosis and vaccination in the Austro-Hungarian army in World War I|lang=de}}

It was not until the 1960s that J. Vinson demonstrated that Rickettsia quintana could be cultured extracellularly on blood agar and fulfilled Koch's postulates.{{cite journal|last1=Ohl|first1=Michael E.|last2=Spach|first2=David H.|title=Bartonella quintana and Urban Trench Fever|journal=Clinical Infectious Diseases|year=2000|volume=31|issue=1|pages=131-135|doi=10.1086/313890|pmid=10913410}} This led to the reclassification of Rickettsia quintana as Rochalimaea quintana and subsequently Bartonella quintana.{{cite book|title=StatPearls|chapter=Trench Fever|last1=Okorji|first1=Onyinyechukwu|last2=Olarewaju|first2=Olubunmi|last3=Smith|first3=Travis|last4=Pace|first4=William C.|date=13 March 2024|access-date=22 November 2024|pmid=32965930|id=NLM Bookshelf Identification NBK562259|chapter-url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK562259/|via=National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information|publisher=StatPearls Publishing|location=Treasure Island, Florida}}

During World War II, the British Government commissioned sheep dip manufacturer, Cooper, McDougall & Robertson of Berkhamsted, Herts to develop a product which troops could use to ward off lice. After much trial and error, 'AL63', was developed and successfully used in a powder form. The initials stood for 'Anti-Louse' and it was the 63rd preparation which was the most efficacious.{{Cite web |date=12 March 2023 |title=War Work in Dacorum |url=https://www.dacorumheritage.org.uk/article/war-work-in-dacorum/ |access-date=12 March 2023}}{{dead link|date=November 2024}}

{{Reflist}}

{{Medical resources

| DiseasesDB = 29814

| ICD10 = {{ICD10|A|79|0|a|75}}

| ICD9 = {{ICD9|083.1}}

| ICDO =

| OMIM =

| MedlinePlus =

| eMedicineSubj = med

| eMedicineTopic = 2303

| MeshID = D014205

| Orphanet = 64694

}}

{{Bacterial diseases}}

{{Bacterial cutaneous infections}}

{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2019}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Trench Fever}}

Category:Bacterial diseases

Category:Bacterium-related cutaneous conditions

Category:Trench warfare