Skip to main content
Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada logoLink to Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada
. 2019 Oct 11;4(3):131–135. doi: 10.3138/jammi.2019-03-28

Acute flaccid myelitis associated with enterovirus D68: An emerging infectious disease

Julie Blackburn 1,2,, Nicole Le Saux 1
PMCID: PMC9603033  PMID: 36340649

Imagine your 5-year-old child having an unremarkable “cold,” then waking up 3 days later unable to walk and to move his left arm. There is no treatment, and the prognosis is uncertain. In Canada, where polio has been eliminated, the most likely diagnosis is acute flaccid myelitis (AFM).

To understand this relatively novel condition, it is worthwhile to reflect on poliomyelitis, a disease that most of us have never seen. The earliest records of poliovirus (PV) infection date back to the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt (1403–1365 BC), with carvings illustrating a man with a shrunken limb. PV was the first enterovirus (EV) to be discovered, in 1908. There are three serotypes of PV (PV1, PV2, and PV3) which are spread by the fecal–oral route with prolonged shedding in the stool, making stool testing the optimal diagnostic test (13). PV caused a wide clinical spectrum of disease, including acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) in approximately 0.1% of the cases. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines AFP as the sudden onset of paralysis/weakness in any part of the body in a child younger than 15 years of age (4,5). Since the introduction of polio vaccines in 1955, the worldwide incidence of polio has been reduced by 99.9% with a few endemic cases of wild-type PV1 disease still reported in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria (6).

Human non-PV EV are ubiquitous and are subdivided into four species (A, B, C, and D). As many as 80 different EV serotypes can infect humans (4,7). Most EV cause only mild clinical syndromes, such as hand–foot–mouth disease, but some can also lead to devastating non-polio AFP, as documented in a systematic review recently published by Suresh et al (8).

EV-D68 had only been reported sporadically worldwide between 1962 and 2012, but rose to prominence in 2014 when the largest EV-D68 outbreak in history occurred, with up to 2,287 cases worldwide (1,4). Among cases with respiratory illness, there was a new worrisome identification of myelitis resulting in paralysis. During this period, 120 AFP cases were declared in the United States, and a Canadian group described 25 cases in four provinces (Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba) (9). Based on the clinical and radiological features of these cases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) adopted a standardized case definition of AFM. A confirmed AFM case is defined as acute focal limb weakness with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showing mainly grey matter lesions involving ≥1 spinal cord segments, whereas a probable AFM case is defined as acute focal limb weakness with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pleocytosis (>5 cells/mm3) (10).

Changing epidemiology

The EV-D68 virus was first described in 1962 in California, where it was isolated from the oropharynx of children hospitalized with acute wheezing and pneumonia. Distinctive features of EV-D68, as compared with other EV, include: lower optimal growth temperature, leading to better replication in the nasal cavity; and acid sensitivity, hence the inability to survive the passage in the stomach and thereby making it difficult to recover from stool (1,2,4). A study published in 2010 showed that the EV-D68 genome evolved tremendously since its initial discovery in 1962 which may have contributed to increased virulence and fitness culminating in the large outbreak that occurred in 2014 (4).

Since then, multiple reports have been published worldwide linking EV-D68 and AFM cases (9,1118). Moreover, CDC surveillance data has revealed a clear seasonal and biennial pattern (1). A Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report published in November 2018 noted a three-fold increase in the number of confirmed AFM cases (n = 80) when compared with the same period the previous year (19). Similarly, in a report published in February 2019, the United Kingdom AFP Task Force also highlighted the recent rapidly rising number of AFM cases associated with EV-D68 (20).

Evidence of causality

Identification of EV-D68 in clinical specimens from confirmed AFM cases worldwide supports an association between the virus and the clinical syndrome. However, the usual absence of EV-D68 in neurologic specimens (i.e., CSF) and, until recently, the absence of an animal model had left the causal relationship between EV-D68 and AFM unproven.

In 2017, a study published on an experimental mouse model showed that EV-D68 strains from the 2014 outbreak induced a paralytic disease resembling human AFM. The mice inoculated with EV-D68 strains developed paralytic disease. Spinal cord homogenates from paralyzed mice were then made into a lysate, which showed a cytopathic effect in cell culture. The supernatant was then collected and inoculated back into a new mouse that subsequently developed paralytic disease. This demonstrated the fulfillment of Koch’s postulates, thus establishing a causal role between EV-D68 and paralytic disease resembling AFM in an animal model. Subsequently, the presence of EV-D68 viral proteins was seen in motor neurons of paralyzed mice. The authors favoured the hypothesis of a direct viral injury as the pathophysiological process rather than an immune-mediated post-infectious phenomenon to explain the development of neurological damage secondary to EV-D68 infection (21).

To further strengthen the purported causality link, the authors of a study published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases applied the Bradford Hill criteria to EV-D68 and AFM (22). They concluded that seven out of nine criteria are met, including strength of association, consistency, temporality, plausibility, coherence, experiment, and analogy. The only unmet criteria are: specificity, given that multiple pathogens can induce AFM; and biological gradient, given that no dose-response relationship has been demonstrated between EV-D68 exposure and severity of clinical presentation (23).

To our knowledge, only one pathological report from a fatal human central nervous system (CNS) EV-D68 infection has been published. In this case, identification and sequencing of EV-D68 in the CSF, as well as the characteristic histopathologic pattern seen in the CNS, were able to establish the virus as the cause of death (24).

Clinical and radiological features of AFM

AFM predominantly affects pre-school age children, and in the majority of cases, neurologic symptoms are preceded by a non-specific viral prodrome. Paralysis is generally of rapid-onset (hours to days) and is almost always asymmetrical. The pattern of weakness is consistent with a lower motor neuron neuropathy, including hypo or areflexia as well as hypotonia. Cranial nerve involvement is not uncommon, and bowel/bladder dysfunction is occasionally reported. The absence of sensory deficits is also a hallmark of AFM. Imaging by MRI usually shows a predominant T2 hyperintense signal of the spinal cord grey matter. The anterior horn is classically affected, but this finding is not universal. CSF pleocytosis is virtually always present if lumbar puncture is done early in the course of the disease (2531).

Outcome and therapeutics

So far, studies have shown that patients with AFM experience limited motor recovery associated with significant persistent disability requiring intensive rehabilitation, as illustrated by the experience of the Johns Hopkins Transverse Myelitis Center published in December 2018 (27).

Therapeutic options are currently limited since no targeted therapies or interventions (such as corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulins, plasma exchange, or antiviral medication) have been proven effective against AFM (2933).

Microbiologic diagnosis of AFM

Identification of an etiologic agent in AFM cases is time-dependent. Establishing a microbiologic diagnosis requires sampling from all appropriate sites early in the clinical course of the disease. Furthermore, although molecular testing is the gold standard for diagnosis of EV infections, most commercial multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays are not able to differentiate between EV and rhinovirus isolates. Therefore, specific EV in-house developed PCR assays have better analytical sensitivity for detection of EV compared with multiplex PCR assays (1,4). Respiratory samples (both from the nasopharynx and throat) should always be collected early in the clinical course when trying to document EV-D68 infection. Genotyping or serotyping is necessary (and mandatory) in cases of AFP, and obtaining stool samples for PV viral testing is essential for this purpose. Other infectious causes of AFP should also be considered (i.e., Powassan or West Nile virus, herpes viruses) (31,3436).

AFM surveillance in Canada

In Canada, AFP cases in children <15 years old are monitored based on WHO recommendations, to ensure the country remains polio-free. This surveillance is the joint project of the Canadian Paediatric Society and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) through the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program. AFM is included in the Canadian AFP surveillance program, which also captures cases of other neurologic syndromes such as Guillain–Barré and transverse myelitis (5,37).

According to data on the PHAC website (last accessed on March 19, 2019), there are between 27 and 51 cases of AFP reported annually. Between January 1, 2018 and March 6, 2019, 77 cases of AFP were declared, with 49 cases confirmed. In comparison, only 25 cases were confirmed in 2017, supporting the biennial epidemiology (38,39).

Conclusions

AFM associated with EV-D68 is a worrisome emerging infectious disease among children worldwide. A high index of suspicion is essential in order to establish the appropriate diagnosis. Prompt collection of relevant microbiologic samples is critical to identify the etiologic agent. Ruling out poliomyelitis is also crucial in suspected AFM cases to maintain confidence in polio eradication worldwide. Whether vaccines can be developed for non-PV EV–causing neurologic disease remains to be seen.

Competing Interests:

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Ethics Approval:

N/A

Informed Consent:

N/A

Registry and the Registration No. of the Study/Trial:

N/A

Animal Studies:

N/A

Funding:

No funding was received for this work.

Peer Review:

This article has been peer reviewed.

References

  • 1.Cassidy H,Poelman R,Knoester M,Van Leer-Buter CC,Niesters HGM. Enterovirus D68 – The new polio? Front Microbiol. 2018;9:2677. 10.3389/fmicb.2018.02677. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Holm-Hansen CC,Midgley SE,Fischer TK. Global emergence of enterovirus D68: a systematic review. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(5):e64–75. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Lugo D,Krogstad P. Enteroviruses in the early 21st century: new manifestations and challenges. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2016;28(1):107–13. 10.1097/MOP.0000000000000303. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bitnun A,Yeh EA. Acute flaccid paralysis and enteroviral infections. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2018;20(9):34. 10.1007/s11908-018-0641-x. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Rotondo J,Desai S,Pless R,Ahmad R,Squires S,Booth TF. Acute flaccid paralysis surveillance: the need for ruling out polio infection. Paediatr Child Health. 2015;20(6):309–10. 10.1093/pch/20.6.309 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Tangermann RH,Lamoureux C,Tallis G,Goel A. The critical role of acute flaccid paralysis surveillance in the Global Polio Eradication Initiative. Int Health. 2017;9(3):156–63. 10.1093/inthealth/ihx016. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Noor A,Krilov LR. Enterovirus infections. Pediatr Rev. 2016;37(12):505–15. 10.1542/pir.2016-0103. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Suresh S,Forgie S,Robinson J. Non-polio enterovirus detection with acute flaccid paralysis: a systematic review. J Med Virol. 2018;90(1):3–7. 10.1002/jmv.24933. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Yea C,Bitnun A,Robinson J, et al. Longitudinal outcomes in the 2014 acute flaccid paralysis cluster in Canada. J Child Neurol. 2017;32(3):301–7. 10.1177/0883073816680770. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Gill PJ,Bitnun A,Yeh EA. Acute flaccid myelitis. CMAJ. 2018;190(48):E1418. 10.1503/cmaj.181442. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Messacar K,Schreiner TL,Van Haren K, et al. Acute flaccid myelitis: a clinical review of US cases 2012–2015. Ann Neurol. 2016;80(3):326–38. 10.1002/ana.24730. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Schuster JE,Selvarangan R,Hassan F, et al. Clinical course of enterovirus D68 in hospitalized children. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2017;36(3):290–5. 10.1097/INF.0000000000001421. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Knoester M,Helfferich J,Poelman R, et al. Twenty-nine cases of enterovirus-D68-associated acute flaccid myelitis in Europe 2016: a case series and epidemiologic overview. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2019;38(1):16–21. 10.1097/INF.0000000000002188. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Chong PF,Kira R,Mori H, et al. Clinical features of acute flaccid myelitis temporally associated with an enterovirus D68 outbreak: results of a nationwide survey of acute flaccid paralysis in Japan, August–December 2015. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(5):653–64. 10.1093/cid/cix860. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Leventer RJ,Ryan MM,Andersen EW, et al. Acute flaccid myelitis in childhood: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Neurol. 2017;24(8):1077–83. 10.1111/ene.13345. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Kirolos A,Mark K,Shetty J, et al. Outcome of paediatric acute flaccid myelitis associated with enterovirus D68: a case series. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2019;61(3):376–80. Epub 2018 Nov 12. 10.1111/dmcn.14096. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Carballo CM,Erro MG,Sordelli N, et al. Acute flaccid myelitis associated with enterovirus D68 in children, Argentina, 2016. Emerg Infect Dis. 2019;25(3):573–6. 10.3201/eid2503.170897. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Sun S,Gao F,Hu Y, et al. A cross-sectional seroepidemiology study of EV-D68 in China. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2018;7(1):1–7. 10.1038/s41426-018-0103-4. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.McKay SL,Lee AD,Lopez AS, et al. Increase in acute flaccid myelitis – United States, 2018. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(45):1273–5. 10.15585/mmwr.mm6745e1. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.United Kingdom Acute Flaccid Paralysis Afp Task Force. An increase in reports of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) in the United Kingdom, 1 January 2018–21 January 2019: early findings. Euro Surveill. 2019;24(6):pii=1900093. 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2019.24.6.1900093. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Hixon AM,Yu G,Leser JS, et al. A mouse model of paralytic myelitis caused by enterovirus D68. PLoS Pathog. 2017;13(2):e1006199. 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006199. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc R Soc Med. 1965;58(5):295–300. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Messacar K,Asturias EJ,Hixon AM, et al. Enterovirus D68 and acute flaccid myelitis-evaluating the evidence for causality. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(8):e239–47. 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30094-X. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kreuter JD,Barnes A,McCarthy JE, et al. A fatal central nervous system enterovirus 68 infection. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135(6):793–6. https://www.archivesofpathology.org/doi/pdf/10.1043/2010-0174-CR.1. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Elrick MJ,Gordon-Lipkin E,Crawford TO, et al. Clinical subpopulations in a sample of North American children diagnosed with acute flaccid myelitis, 2012–2016. JAMA Pediatr. 2018;173(2):134–9. 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.4890. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kramer R,Lina B,Shetty J. Acute flaccid myelitis caused by enterovirus D68: case definitions for use in clinical practice. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2019;23(2):235–9. 10.1016/j.ejpn.2019.01.001. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Gordon-Lipkin E,Muñoz LS,Klein JL,Dean J,Izbudak I,Pardo CA. Comparative quantitative clinical, neuroimaging, and functional profiles in children with acute flaccid myelitis at acute and convalescent stages of disease. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2019;61(3):366–75. Epub 2018 Sep 17. 10.1111/dmcn.14030. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Nelson GR,Bonkowsky JL,Doll E, et al. Recognition and management of acute flaccid myelitis in children. Pediatr Neurol. 2016;55:17–21. 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2015.10.007. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Okumura A,Mori H. Acute flaccid myelitis: an emerging clinical entity. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2019;61(3):290–1. Epub 2018 Nov 12. 10.1111/dmcn.14107. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Messacar K,Tyler KL. Enterovirus D68-associated acute flaccid myelitis: rising to the clinical and research challenges. JAMA. 2019;321(9):831–2. 10.1001/jama.2019.1016. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Hopkins SE,Elrick MJ,Messacar K. Acute flaccid myelitis-keys to diagnosis, questions about treatment, and future directions. JAMA Pediatr. 2018;173(2):117–8. 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.4896. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Stelzer-Braid S,Rawlinson W. Outbreaks of acute flaccid myelitis in the US. BMJ. 2018;363:k5246. 10.1136/bmj.k5246. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Devi S. US CDC task force to investigate acute flaccid myelitis cases. Lancet. 2018;392(10162):2339. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33012-5. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Montalvo M,Cho TA,Montavo M,Cho TA. Infectious myelopathies. Neurol Clin. 2018;36(4):789–808. 10.1016/j.ncl.2018.06.001. Medline: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kemenesi G,Bányai K. Tick-borne flaviviruses, with a focus on Powassan virus. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018;32(1):pii:e00106–17. 10.1128/CMR.00106-17. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Bogaty C,Drebot M. Powassan virus – an emerging public health concern. CMAJ. 2018;190(15):E472. 10.1503/cmaj.171305. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Maguire J,Thibodeau ML,Oliver J. CPSP 2014 results: what have we learned? Paediatr Child Health. 2015;20(8):435–6. 10.1093/pch/20.8.435. Medline: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Public Health Agency of Canada. Surveillance of acute flaccid paralysis [Internet]. Ottawa: Government of Canada; c2018. [updated 2018 Nov 14; cited 2019 Mar 19]. Available from: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/surveillance/acute-flaccid-paralysis.html. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Public Health Agency of Canada. Information for Canadians regarding reports of acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) [Internet]. Ottawa: Government of Canada; c2019. [updated 2019 Mar 6; cited 2019 Mar 19]. Available from: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/acute-flaccid-myelitis.html. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada are provided here courtesy of University of Toronto Press

RESOURCES