Suneth B. AgampodiSharon J. PeacockVasanthi ThevanesamDanaseela B. NugegodaLee SmytheJanjira ThaipadungpanitScott B. CraigMary Ann BurnsMichael DohntSiriphan BoonsilpThamarasi SenaratneAthula KumaraPaba PalihawadanaSahan PereraJoseph M. VinetzUniversity of ColomboUniversity of California, San Diego, School of MedicineMahidol UniversityUniversity of CambridgeUniversity of PeradeniyaOrganisation Mondiale de la SanteUniversity of the Sunshine CoastMinistry of Health Colombo2018-05-032018-05-032011-09-01American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. Vol.85, No.3 (2011), 471-478000296372-s2.0-80052813834https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/12005Global leptospirosis disease burden estimates are hampered by the lack of scientifically sound data from countries with probable high endemicity and limited diagnostic capacities. We describe the seroepidemiologic and clinical characteristics of the leptospirosis outbreak in 2008 in Sri Lanka. Definitive/presumptive case definitions proposed by the World Health Organization Leptospirosis Epidemiology Reference Group were used for case confirmation. Of the 404 possible cases, 155 were confirmed to have leptospirosis. Highest titers of patient seum samples reacted with serovars Pyrogenes (28.7%), Hardjo (18.8%), Javanica (11.5%), and Hebdomadis (11.5%). Sequencing of the 16S ribosomal DNA gene identified six infections: five with Leptospira interrogans and one with L. weilli. In this patient population, acute renal failure was the main complication (14.8%), followed by myocarditis (7.1%) and heart failure (3.9%). The case-fatality rate was 1.3%. This report strengthens the urgent need for increasing laboratory diagnostic capabilities to determine the causes of epidemic and endemic infectious diseases in Sri Lanka, a finding relevant to other tropical regions. Copyright © 2011 by The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.Mahidol UniversityImmunology and MicrobiologyMedicineLeptospirosis outbreak in Sri Lanka in 2008: Lessons for assessing the global burden of diseaseArticleSCOPUS10.4269/ajtmh.2011.11-0276