Frequency of respiratory pathogens and SARS‐CoV‐2 in canine and feline samples submitted for respiratory testing in early 2020
Frequency of respiratory pathogens and SARS‐CoV‐2 in canine and feline samples submitted for respiratory testing in early 2020
Published 22 March 2021
Michael, H.T. et al (2021) Frequency of respiratory pathogens and SARS‐CoV‐2 in canine and feline samples submitted for respiratory testing in early 2020. Journal of Small Animal Practice. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsap.13300
This paper reports on the development and validation of SARS-CoV-2 PCR test for use in animals. The test was then used to establish the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 in samples from 4616 dogs and cats submitted for testing for respiratory pathogens to IDEXX laboratories in Asia, Europe and North America between mid-February and mid-April 2020. The frequency of respiratory pathogens detected was then compared for the periods February–April 2019 and 2020.
Conjunctival and deep pharyngeal swabs were submitted for each patient. If multiple samples were submitted for an individual patient during the study window, only the first sample was included in the analysis.
Samples from 2150 dogs and 2466 cats were tested and 44% of canine and 69% of feline samples were PCR positive for at least one respiratory pathogen with Mycoplasma cynos and Bordetella bronchiseptica the most commonly detected pathogens in dogs, and Mycoplasma felis and feline calicivirus, the most commonly detected pathogens in cats. No SARS‐CoV‐2 infections were identified. Positive results for respiratory samples were similar between years.
As part of the development, cross‐specificity testing to rule out false positives caused by other veterinary coronaviruses was performed using veterinary patient samples that had tested positive at IDEXX Reference Laboratories. Commercially available PCR tests were used for the canine respiratory coronavirus (CrCoV -30 samples), canine enteric coronavirus (CeCoV -30 samples), feline enteric coronavirus (FeCoV -30 samples) and equine coronavirus( ECoV -two samples). None of these samples had a positive result with the SARS‐CoV‐2 real‐time PCR. None of the 55 human patient isolates (36 SARS‐CoV‐2 positive and 19 SARS‐CoV‐2 negative) tested were positive for the CrCoV, CeCoV, FeCoV or ECoV.
The authors conclude that these data suggest there is currently no need for widespread SARS‐CoV‐2 testing in the dog and cat population since naturally occurring clinical infections are rare in dogs and cats. Practitioners should continue to consider and test for common respiratory pathogens before SARS‐CoV‐2 infection is considered in pet dogs and cats with respiratory signs.
It should be noted that this study was carried out early in the COVID pandemic which may have affected both the number samples submitted and the respiratory pathogens
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!