Cargando…
Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review
PURPOSE: To complement conventional testing methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections, dogs’ olfactory capability for true real-time detection has been investigated worldwide. Diseases produce specific scents in affected individuals via volatile organic compounds. T...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10195768/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37209927 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.05.002 |
_version_ | 1785044201496379392 |
---|---|
author | Meller, Sebastian Caraguel, Charles Twele, Friederike Charalambous, Marios Schoneberg, Clara Chaber, Anne-Lise Desquilbet, Loïc Grandjean, Dominique Mardones, Fernando O. Kreienbrock, Lothar de la Rocque, Stéphane Volk, Holger A. |
author_facet | Meller, Sebastian Caraguel, Charles Twele, Friederike Charalambous, Marios Schoneberg, Clara Chaber, Anne-Lise Desquilbet, Loïc Grandjean, Dominique Mardones, Fernando O. Kreienbrock, Lothar de la Rocque, Stéphane Volk, Holger A. |
author_sort | Meller, Sebastian |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To complement conventional testing methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections, dogs’ olfactory capability for true real-time detection has been investigated worldwide. Diseases produce specific scents in affected individuals via volatile organic compounds. This systematic review evaluates the current evidence for canine olfaction as a reliable coronavirus disease 2019 screening tool. METHODS: Two independent study quality assessment tools were used: the QUADAS-2 tool for the evaluation of laboratory tests’ diagnostic accuracy, designed for systematic reviews, and a general evaluation tool for canine detection studies, adapted to medical detection. Various study design, sample, dog, and olfactory training features were considered as potential confounding factors. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies from 15 countries were evaluated. Respectively, four and six studies had a low risk of bias and high quality: the four QUADAS-2 nonbiased studies resulted in ranges of 81%–97% sensitivity and 91%–100% specificity. The six high-quality studies, according to the general evaluation system, revealed ranges of 82%–97% sensitivity and 83%–100% specificity. The other studies contained high bias risks and applicability and/or quality concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Standardization and certification procedures as used for canine explosives detection are needed for medical detection dogs for the optimal and structured usage of their undoubtful potential. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10195768 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101957682023-05-19 Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review Meller, Sebastian Caraguel, Charles Twele, Friederike Charalambous, Marios Schoneberg, Clara Chaber, Anne-Lise Desquilbet, Loïc Grandjean, Dominique Mardones, Fernando O. Kreienbrock, Lothar de la Rocque, Stéphane Volk, Holger A. Ann Epidemiol Review Article PURPOSE: To complement conventional testing methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections, dogs’ olfactory capability for true real-time detection has been investigated worldwide. Diseases produce specific scents in affected individuals via volatile organic compounds. This systematic review evaluates the current evidence for canine olfaction as a reliable coronavirus disease 2019 screening tool. METHODS: Two independent study quality assessment tools were used: the QUADAS-2 tool for the evaluation of laboratory tests’ diagnostic accuracy, designed for systematic reviews, and a general evaluation tool for canine detection studies, adapted to medical detection. Various study design, sample, dog, and olfactory training features were considered as potential confounding factors. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies from 15 countries were evaluated. Respectively, four and six studies had a low risk of bias and high quality: the four QUADAS-2 nonbiased studies resulted in ranges of 81%–97% sensitivity and 91%–100% specificity. The six high-quality studies, according to the general evaluation system, revealed ranges of 82%–97% sensitivity and 83%–100% specificity. The other studies contained high bias risks and applicability and/or quality concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Standardization and certification procedures as used for canine explosives detection are needed for medical detection dogs for the optimal and structured usage of their undoubtful potential. Elsevier 2023-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10195768/ /pubmed/37209927 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.05.002 Text en © 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Article Meller, Sebastian Caraguel, Charles Twele, Friederike Charalambous, Marios Schoneberg, Clara Chaber, Anne-Lise Desquilbet, Loïc Grandjean, Dominique Mardones, Fernando O. Kreienbrock, Lothar de la Rocque, Stéphane Volk, Holger A. Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review |
title | Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review |
title_full | Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review |
title_short | Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review |
title_sort | canine olfactory detection of sars-cov-2-infected humans—a systematic review |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10195768/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37209927 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.05.002 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mellersebastian canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT caraguelcharles canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT twelefriederike canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT charalambousmarios canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT schonebergclara canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT chaberannelise canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT desquilbetloic canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT grandjeandominique canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT mardonesfernandoo canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT kreienbrocklothar canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT delarocquestephane canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview AT volkholgera canineolfactorydetectionofsarscov2infectedhumansasystematicreview |