Wild nine-banded armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus) in the south central United States are highly endemic natural hosts of Mycobacterium leprae. Surveys conducted over the last 30 years on more than 5000 animals confirm that the infection is present among armadillos in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Highest prevalence rates are found among the animals in low-lying alluvial and coastal areas, primarily in Louisiana and Texas. Both animal density and local factors may contribute to the detectability of armadillo leprosy in those regions. Little evidence for M. leprae infection is found among armadillos elsewhere in the US range, and only a few reports relate finding the infection among animals in Central or South America. However, the issue has received only scant attention in other countries. Armadillos only recently expanded their range into the US, and leprosy was present in Texas and Louisiana prior to the arrival of armadillos. The ecological relationship between humans and armadillos with M. leprae in this region remains unclear. However, infected armadillos constitute a large reservoir of M. leprae and they may be a source of infection for some humans in this country, and perhaps in other locations across the animal’s range.

Elimination of leprosy as a public health problem, defined by a registered prevalence of less than one case per 10,000 population, was achieved by Bangladesh in 1998, and steady reduction in prevalence is ongoing. It is less certain whether a sustained reduction in case detection is occurring, with little overall change in some longstanding programme areas, though the overall annual new case detection rate has fallen by over one-third between 1996 and 2004, from 9.8 to 6.1 per 100,000. Concerns about ‘hidden’ cases have been raised in Bangladesh as elsewhere, though the National Leprosy Elimination Campaign of 1999 detected relatively fewer new cases than in other countries, and mainly in low endemic areas. Investigation into the correct diagnosis of leprosy and recording and reporting practices has not suggested high levels of over-diagnosis or ‘over-registration’. Both before and since achievement of the elimination target at national level, the collaboration of Non- Governmental Organizations with the national Leprosy Elimination Program has been considerable. NGOs now support ongoing leprosy control efforts in rural and urban populations, moderate to high endemic for leprosy, amounting to 50% of the entire population, and NGO staff look after 75% of all new cases in Bangladesh. This close collaboration has highlighted the potential for large-scale partnership in disease control, and has expanded to extensive partnership in tuberculosis control, which will hopefully enhance cost-effectiveness and quality of both programmes. Further challenges remain in the area of urban leprosy control, where leprosy case finding represents 30% of the whole country, but public health infrastructure and community organization is weakest. Sustaining of leprosy services in the long term is a significant concern, and new modes of collaboration, with a more technical, supportive role for NGOs in some areas is being piloted.

Plantar ulceration is the most common serious disability occurring in patients of leprosy. Growth and emergence of innovative procedures in plastic surgery has greatly revolutionized the treatment of this highly frustrating problem. In the present study, a total of 40 leprosy patients were included. These ulcers were managed using different types of local superficial flaps (advancement, rotation, transposition and first toe web flap). Majority of ulcers healed within 4 weeks and patients were discharged within 6–8 weeks postoperatively. Patients were followed up for a period of 6 months to 3 years. Ulcers recurred in only 25% of all the ulcers operated upon and we observed that management of plantar ulcers by using appropriate local superficial plantar flaps is a viable option and worth trying in view of low incidence of recurrence and relatively shorter duration of hospital stay.

Pure neural leprosy (PNL) is difficult to diagnose because skin lesions and acid-fast bacilli (AFB) in slit smears are absent. At present, the gold standard for PNL diagnosis is the histopathological examination of a peripheral nerve biopsy. Even so, detection of bacteria is difficult and histological findings may be non-specific. Furthermore, nerve biopsy is an invasive procedure that is only possible in specialized centres. Therefore, there is a need for additional diagnostic methods that may help to confirm the clinical diagnosis of PNL. In the present study, an additional laboratory test, the ELISA for anti-phenolic glycolipid I (PGL-I) IgM antibodies, was performed on 103 individuals with clinical and neurophysiological signs of peripheral neuropathy, of which 67 were diagnosed as PNL patients and 36 remained as ‘not diagnosed as PNL’, as well as on a control group of 34 patients with other neurological diseases. An antibody response was present in 14/67 (21%) of the patients diagnosed as PNL as compared with 3/34 (9%) of controls. Anti-PGL-I positivity was observed in 5/8 (63%) of the AFB positive cases. Patients whose diagnosis was confirmed solely by Mycobacterium leprae PCR on the nerve sample had 4/25 (16%) seropositivity. In addition, anti-PGL-I antibodies were detected in 9/40 (23%) of the PNL patients who were PCR negative for M. leprae DNA. Moreover, two patients who showed clinical and eletrophysiological manifestations suggestive of PNL were diagnosed with the help of their positive test results in the anti-PGL-I ELISA. In conclusion, detection of antibodies against PGL-I in patients with peripheral neuropathy is useful as an additional laboratory test to help PNL diagnosis.