TY - JOUR
AU - Meller, Sebastian
AU - Al Khatri, Maryam Sultan Ali
AU - Alhammadi, Hamad Khatir
AU - Álvarez, Guadalupe
AU - Alvergnat, Guillaume
AU - Alves, Lêucio Câmara
AU - Callewaert, Chris
AU - Caraguel, Charles G.B.
AU - Carancci, Paula
AU - Chaber, Anne-Lise
AU - Charalambous, Marios
AU - Desquilbet, Loïc
AU - Ebbers, Janek
AU - Grandjean, Dominique
AU - Guest, Claire
AU - Guyot, Hugues
AU - Hielm-Björkman, Anna
AU - Hopkins, Amy
AU - Kreienbrock, Lothar
AU - Logan, James G.
AU - Lorenzo, Hector
AU - de Cassia, Rita Carvalho Maia
AU - Mancilla-Tapia, Juan M.
AU - Mardones, Fernando O.
AU - Mutesa, Leon
AU - Nsanzimana, Sabin
AU - Otto, Cynthia M.
AU - Salgado-Caxito, Marilia
AU - de los Santos, Florencia
AU - da Silva, Jeine Emanuele Santos
AU - Schalke, Esther
AU - Schoneberg, Clara
AU - Soares, Anisio Francisco
AU - Twele, Friederike
AU - Vidal-Martínez, Victor Manuel
AU - Zapata, Ariel
AU - Zimin-Veselkoff, Natalia
AU - Volk, Holger A
PY - 2022
DA - December
TI - Expert considerations and consensus for using dogs to detect human SARS-CoV-2-infections
JO - Frontiers in Medicine
VL - 9
DO - https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1015620
AB - The respiratory coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) quickly developed into a pandemic. Even though laboratory diagnostic tests and vaccines were consequently developed, the exploration of rapidly deployable, more reliable tools for addressing the current and future pandemics was vital. Toward this goal, researchers worldwide evaluated the use of medical detection dogs as a rapid, reliable and cost-effective screening method for SARS-CoV-2 infections. The ability of dogs to distinguish diseases by their high-resolution sense of smell is based on the volatile organic compound (VOC)-hypothesis. Numerous infectious and non-infectious diseases change metabolic processes releasing characteristic VOC-patterns in the form of an “olfactory fingerprint”. Many studies have shown that dogs can detect metabolic disorders, such as cancerand hypoglycemia, predict epileptic seizures, or even distinguish various pathogens. Approximately 78% of the 27 SARS-CoV-2-canine detection studies reviewed by Meller et al. yielded &gt; 80% sensitivity and approximately 60% of studies yielded &gt; 95% of specificity, highlighting the potential of the dog as a “diagnostic system” and its recommendation for certain settings. Despite these promising results, all studies published up to now differed in numerous design features. They were mostly designed as pilot studies and case-control selection of patients was mostly favored over a more preferable cross-sectional (“cohort”) selection [study quality assessment was conducted and presented by Meller et al.]. The aim of this comprehensive review summary is to provide a general overview of the divergent aspects that may impact canine disease detection and to provide recommendations for future deployment of medical detection dogs (see also summary inTable 1). Specific emphasis is placed on the choice of dogs, training paradigms, safety aspects, sample characteristics, pre-screen processing (e.g., inactivation), and screening-population and its environment related aspects, respectively (see alsoFigure 1andSupplementary Figure 1), providing an outlook and proposals for the future standardization in the use of dogs for disease detection. Ultimately, this report provides a blueprint for the potential use of medical detection dogs in future epidemics and pandemics.
PB - Frontiers Media
UR - https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/expert-considerations-and-consensus-for-using-dogs-to-detect-huma
KW - Coronavirus (COVID-19)
ER