Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
J Breath Res ; 16(3)2022 04 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740724

ABSTRACT

A Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test of a nasal swab is still the 'gold standard' for detecting a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, PCR testing could be usefully complemented by non-invasive, fast, reliable, cheap methods for detecting infected individuals in busy areas (e.g. airports and railway stations) or remote areas. Detection of the volatile, semivolatile and non-volatile compound signature of SARS-CoV-2 infection by trained sniffer dogs might meet these requirements. Previous studies have shown that well-trained dogs can detect SARS-CoV-2 in sweat, saliva and urine samples. The objective of the present study was to assess the performance of dogs trained to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in axillary-sweat-stained gauzes and on expired breath trapped in surgical masks. The samples were provided by individuals suffering from mild-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), asymptomatic individuals, and individuals vaccinated against COVID-19. Results: Seven trained dogs tested on 886 presentations of sweat samples from 241 subjects and detected SARS-CoV-2 with a diagnostic sensitivity (relative to the PCR test result) of 89.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 86.4%-92.2%) and a specificity of 83.9% (95% CI: 80.3%-87.0%)-even when people with a low viral load were included in the analysis. When considering the 207 presentations of sweat samples from vaccinated individuals, the sensitivity and specificity were respectively 85.7% (95% CI: 68.5%-94.3%) and 86.0% (95% CI: 80.2%-90.3%). The likelihood of a false-positive result was greater in the two weeks immediately after COVID-19 vaccination. Four of the seven dogs also tested on 262 presentations of mask samples from 98 subjects; the diagnostic sensitivity was 83.1% (95% CI: 73.2%-89.9%) and the specificity was 88.6% (95% CI: 83.3%-92.4%). There was no difference (McNemar's testP= 0.999) in the dogs' abilities to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in paired samples of sweat-stained gauzes vs surgical masks worn for only 10 min. Conclusion: Our findings confirm the promise of SARS-CoV-2 screening by detection dogs and broaden the method's scope to vaccinated individuals and easy-to-obtain face masks, and suggest that a 'dogs + confirmatory rapid antigen detection tests' screening strategy might be worth investigating.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Animals , Breath Tests , COVID-19 Vaccines , Dogs , Humans , RNA, Viral/analysis , SARS-CoV-2 , Sweat/chemistry , Working Dogs
2.
J Public Health (Oxf) ; 44(1): e36-e41, 2022 03 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1735635

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Early screening for COVID-19 is needed to limit the spread of the virus. The aim of this study is to test if the sniffer dogs can be successfully trained to identify subjects with COVID-19 for 'proof of concept' and 'non-inferiority' against PCR. We are calling this method, Dognosis (DN). METHODS: Four hundred and fifty-nine subjects were included, 256 (Group 'P') were known cases of COVID-19 (PCR positive, some with and some without symptoms) and 203 (Group 'C') were PCR negative and asymptomatic (control). Samples were obtained from the axillary sweat of each subject in a masked fashion. Two dogs trained to detect specific Volatile Organic Compounds for COVID-19 detection were used to test each sample. RESULTS: [DN] turned out positive (+) in all the cases that were PCR positive (100% sensitivity). On the other hand, [DN] turned positive (+) in an average of 12.5 cases (6.2%) that were initially PCR negative (apparent specificity of 93.8%). When the PCR was repeated, true specificity was 97.2%. These parameters varied in subgroups from 100% sensitivity and 99% specificity in symptomatic patients to 100% sensitivity and 93% specificity in asymptomatic patients. CONCLUSION: DN method shows high sensitivity and specificity in screening COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Animals , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Dogs , Humans , Odorants , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Sweat , Working Dogs
3.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0243122, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-966848

ABSTRACT

The aim of this proof-of-concept study was to evaluate if trained dogs could discriminate between sweat samples from symptomatic COVID-19 positive individuals (SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive) and those from asymptomatic COVID-19 negative individuals. The study was conducted at 2 sites (Paris, France, and Beirut, Lebanon), followed the same training and testing protocols, and involved six detection dogs (three explosive detection dogs, one search and rescue dog, and two colon cancer detection dogs). A total of 177 individuals were recruited for the study (95 symptomatic COVID-19 positive and 82 asymptomatic COVID-19 negative individuals) from five hospitals, and one underarm sweat sample per individual was collected. The dog training sessions lasted between one and three weeks. Once trained, the dog had to mark the COVID-19 positive sample randomly placed behind one of three or four olfactory cones (the other cones contained at least one COVID-19 negative sample and between zero and two mocks). During the testing session, a COVID-19 positive sample could be used up to a maximum of three times for one dog. The dog and its handler were both blinded to the COVID-positive sample location. The success rate per dog (i.e., the number of correct indications divided by the number of trials) ranged from 76% to 100%. The lower bound of the 95% confidence interval of the estimated success rate was most of the time higher than the success rate obtained by chance after removing the number of mocks from calculations. These results provide some evidence that detection dogs may be able to discriminate between sweat samples from symptomatic COVID-19 individuals and those from asymptomatic COVID-19 negative individuals. However, due to the limitations of this proof-of-concept study (including using some COVID-19 samples more than once and potential confounding biases), these results must be confirmed in validation studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Sweat/virology , Working Dogs , Animals , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Testing , Dogs , Female , France , Humans , Lebanon , Male , Proof of Concept Study , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Smell , Sweat/chemistry , Working Dogs/physiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL