Risk Factors for SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Illness in Cats and Dogs1.

We tested swab specimens from pets in households in Ontario, Canada, with human COVID-19 cases by quantitative PCR for SARS-CoV-2 and surveyed pet owners for risk factors associated with infection and seropositivity. We tested serum samples for spike protein IgG and IgM in household pets and also in animals from shelters and low-cost neuter clinics. Among household pets, 2% (1/49) of swab specimens from dogs and 7.7% (5/65) from cats were PCR positive, but 41% of dog serum samples and 52% of cat serum samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG or IgM. The likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity in pet samples was higher for cats but not dogs that slept on owners' beds and for dogs and cats that contracted a new illness. Seropositivity in neuter-clinic samples was 16% (35/221); in shelter samples, 9.3% (7/75). Our findings indicate a high likelihood for pets in households of humans with COVID-19 to seroconvert and become ill.

Neurologic Baylisascaris procyonis infection in a young dog.

A 14-week-old female Boston terrier-cross dog with intermittent gastroenteritis and an eosinophilia developed progressive neurologic disease with ataxia progressing to uncontrolled paddling. Autopsy revealed Baylisascaris procyonis larvae in 4 of 7 brain sections, with severe eosinophilic meningoencephalitis. Diagnosis was confirmed with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and DNA sequencing tests of fresh and paraffin-embedded brain in conjunction with the compatible histologic appearance.

Infection neurologique à Baylisascaris procyonis chez une jeune chienne. Une jeune chienne terrier de Boston de race croisée âgée de 14 semaines a été atteinte de gastroentérite intermittente et d'éosinophilie et a développé une maladie neurologique progressive avec de l'ataxie progressant à des mouvements involontaires. L'autopsie a révélé une larve de Baylisascaris procyonis dans 4 des 7 sections du cerveau, avec une méningo-encéphalite éosinophilique grave. Le diagnostic a été confirmé par amplification en chaîne par polymérase (PCR) et des tests de séquençage de l'ADN de tissus du cerveau frais et inclus dans la paraffine conjointement à l'apparence histologique compatible.(Traduit par Isabelle Vallières).

Delay in final publication following abstract presentation: American College of Veterinary Anesthesiologists annual meeting.

RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY: A review of abstracts presented at nine annual meetings of the American College of Veterinary Anesthesiologists was undertaken to determine the average time to publication and the differences found between conference abstracts and final publications. Concerns about and advantages of using such abstracts in our teaching are considered. METHODOLOGY: Conference proceedings during the years 1990 through 1999 were considered. Key word and author searches using two common search engines were carried out to find whether abstracts presented had been published. The original article or its abstract was reviewed for consistency with the conference abstract. RESULTS: Of 283 abstracts examined, 73.5% were published in journals as full articles. The overall delay (+/-SD) in publication was 24.3 +/- 21.0 months. Common reasons for not publishing included too little time, more interest in carrying out the work than in writing it up, and other more demanding tasks. Authors indicated the intention of completing a submission on approximately 10% of the unpublished abstracts. The final articles reviewed showed major differences in key aspects from the abstract presented in 7% of the cases. In half of these cases, clinical action could have been affected by a change in emphasis of the conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the delay in publication of research, peer review of standardized abstracts should be encouraged. This material can be used to introduce students to new drugs, techniques, and results that may not otherwise become available until after their graduation. However, caution must be exercised in using this information, both because significant differences were noted in final publications and because unpublished research may be poorly interpreted at the time of presentation. This study emphasizes the value of critical review and lifelong learning in our careers.