Dengue or Kokobera? A case report from the top end of the Northern Territory

In early April 1998, the Centre for Disease Control in Darwin was notified of a possible case of dengue which appeared to have been acquired in the Northern Territory. Because dengue is not endemic to the Northern Territory, locally acquired infection has significant public health implications, particularly for vector identification and control to limit the spread of infection. Dengue IgM serology was positive on two occasions, but the illness was eventually presumptively identified as Kokobera infection. This case illustrates the complexity of interpreting flavivirus serology. Determining the cause of infection requires consideration of the clinical illness, the incubation period, the laboratory results and vector presence. Waiting for confirmation of results, before the institution of the public health measures necessary for a true case of dengue, was ultimately justified in this case. This is a valid approach in the Northern Territory, but may not be applicable to areas of Australia with established vectors for dengue. Commun Dis Intell 1998;22:105-107.

A case presenting diagnostic difficulties : making sense of flavivirus serology in the Top End of the Northern Territory

In early April 1998 the Centre for Disease Control (CDC) in Darwin was notified of a case with positive dengue serology. The illness appeared to have been acquired in the Northern Territory (NT). Because dengue is not endemic to the NT, locally acquired infection has significant public health implications, particularly for vector identification and control to limit the spread of infection. Dengue IgM serology was positive on two occasions but the illness was eventually presumptively identified as Kokobera infection. This case illustrates some important points about serology. The interpretation of flavivirus serology is complex and can be misleading, despite recent improvements. The best method of determining the cause of infection is still attempting to reconcile clinical illness details with incubation times and vector presence, as well as laboratory results. This approach ultimately justified the initial period of waiting for confirmatory results in this case, before the institution of public health measures necessary for a true case of dengue.