Search

Objective: To develop a French Short Version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (Fr-sQOD) to assess the quality of life impairments of patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD). Methods: Patients with OD and controls were enrolled from 2 academic centers. Individuals completed the Fr-sQOD, an OD visual analog scale severity, and the French version of the sinonasal outcome tool-22 (SNOT-22). Cronbach α was used to measure the internal consistency of Fr-sQOD. The reliability and the external validity of Fr-sQOD were assessed through a test–retest approach and by correlating Fr-sQOD with SNOT-22 scores, respectively. The external validity was assessed by correlation analysis between Fr-sQOD and the result of an assessment of the severity of OD on a visual analog scale. Results: Eighty patients completed the evaluations. The internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach α.96), and the test–retest reliability was high in the entire cohort (rs = 0.877, P <.001). The correlation between Fr-sQOD total scores and the severity of OD was moderate but significant (rs = −0.431; P =.001) supporting an acceptable external validity. Patients with OD had a significantly higher score of Fr-sQOD than healthy individuals (P <.001), indicating a high internal validity. Conclusion: The Fr-sQOD is a reliable and valid self-administered tool in the evaluation of the impact of OD on quality of life of French-speaking patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) injection into the olfactory clefts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). Study Design: Controlled study. Setting: Multicenter study. Methods: From March 2022 to November 2022, COVID‐19 patients with persistent OD were recruited from three European hospitals to undergo PRP injections into the olfactory clefts. Olfactory function was evaluated at baseline and 10 weeks postinjection with the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire (ODQ) and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. Data were compared with a control group of untreated patients. Results: Eighty‐one patients who underwent PRP injection and 78 controls were included. Sixty‐five PRP patients (80.3%) experienced subjective smell improvement after a mean duration of 3.4 ± 1.9 weeks. The parosmia, life quality statement, and ODQ sub‐ and total scores significantly decreased from pre‐ to 10‐week postinjection in the PRP group. The TDI sub‐ and total scores significantly increased 10 weeks postinjection. In controls, the ODQ score did not change over time, while the discrimination, identification, and total TDI scores significantly increase after 10 weeks of follow‐up. The 10‐week TDI and ODQ scores were significantly better in the PRP group compared with the controls. Conclusion: Patients who underwent PRP injection reported better 10‐week subjective and objective smell outcomes than controls. Future randomized‐controlled studies using saline injection into the olfactory cleft of controls are needed to determine the superiority of PRP over placebo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the prevalence and recovery of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in COVID‐19 patients 24 months after the infection. Methods: From 22 March 2020 to 5 June 2022, 251 COVID‐19 patients were followed in three European medical centres. Olfactory function was assessed with subjective patient‐reported outcome questionnaires and odour identification tests at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postinfection. The predictive values of epidemiological and clinical data were investigated with multivariate analysis. Results: One hundred and seventy‐one patients completed the evaluations. The odour identification test revealed that 123 patients (50.8%) had OD at baseline. The prevalence of persistent psychophysical abnormalities at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months post‐COVID‐19 was 24.2%, 17.9%, 5.8% and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.001). Parosmia occurred in 40 patients (23.4%) and lasted 60 ± 119 days. At 2 years, 51 patients (29.8%) self reported that their olfaction was unnormalised. Older patients had better odour identification evaluations at baseline (p < 0.001) but those with OD reported lower odour identification test scores at the end of the follow‐up. Parosmia occurred more frequently in young patients. The olfactory training was significantly associated with higher values of Sniffin' Sticks tests at 18 months postinfection (rs = 0.678; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Two years post‐COVID‐19, 29.8% of patients reported persistent OD, but only 2.9% had abnormal identification psychophysical evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we described technique of platelet rich plasma injection into the olfactory cleft in a 22-year-old female with 24-month post–COVID-19 anosmia. The technique starts with the blood extraction and the isolation of PRP through a 10-min centrifugation. The supernatant was injected in nasal regions after a local anesthesia through a 0° rigid optic. Several points of.2–.5 mL were performed in the nasal septum in regard of the head of the middle turbine and in the head of the middle turbine in both sides. The baseline threshold, discrimination, and identification scores were 1, 8, and 0, and the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire score was 51, respectively. The injection of PRP in olfactory cleft was done without complication and mild pain. The patient perception of recovery of smell sense occurred at 3-week post-injection. From this time, the smell sense progressively improved to the 2-month consultation. At 2-month post-injection, the TDI scores reached 16, 16, and 16 (48), while the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire was 73. The injection of PRP into the olfactory cleft appears to be a safe and easiness new approach that may improve the recovery of smell sense. Future controlled studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this multicenter case-control study was to evaluate a group of patients at least 1 year after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with Sniffin' Sticks tests and to compare the results with a control population to quantify the potential bias introduced by the underlying prevalence of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in the general population. The study included 170 cases and 170 controls. In the COVID-19 group, 26.5% of cases had OD (anosmia in 4.7%, hyposmia in 21.8%) versus 3.5% in the control group (6 cases of hyposmia). The TDI score (threshold, discrimination, and identification) in the COVID-19 group was significantly lower than in the control group (32.5 [interquartile range, 29-36.5] vs 36.75 [34-39.5], P < .001). The prevalence of OD was significantly higher in the COVID-19 group, confirming that this result is not due to the underlying prevalence of OD in the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate prevalence and epidemiological and clinical factors associated with olfactory dysfunction (OD) and gustatory dysfunction (GD) in COVID-19 patients according to the disease severity. Study design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: A total of 2579 patients with a positive diagnosis of COVID-19 were identified between March 22 and June 3, 2020 from 18 European hospitals. Epidemiological and clinical data were extracted. Otolaryngological symptoms, including OD and GD, were collected through patient-reported outcome questionnaire and Sniffin'Sticks tests were carried out in a subset of patients. Results: A total of 2579 patients were included, including 2166 mild (84.0%), 144 moderate (5.6%) and 269 severe-to-critical (10.4%) patients. Mild patients presented an otolaryngological picture of the disease with OD, GD, nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea and sore throat as the most prevalent symptoms. The prevalence of subjective OD and GD was 73.7 and 46.8%, and decreases with the severity of the disease. Females had higher prevalence of subjective OD and GD compared with males. Diabetes was associated with a higher risk to develop GD. Among the subset of patients who benefited from psychophysical olfactory evaluations, there were 75 anosmic, 43 hyposmic and 113 normosmic patients. The prevalence of anosmia significantly decreased with the severity of the disease. Anosmia or hyposmia were not associated with any nasal disorder, according to SNOT-22. Conclusion: OD and GD are more prevalent in patients with mild COVID-19 compared with individuals with moderate, severe or critical diseases. Females might have a higher risk of developing OD and GD compared with males. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) status of patients with initial sudden olfactory anosmia (ISOA) through nasopharyngeal swabs for reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis and to explore their olfactory dysfunctions with psychophysical olfactory evaluation. Methods: A total of 78 ISOA patients were recruited from April 6, 2020, to April 10, 2020, through a public call of University of Mons (Mons, Belgium). Patients benefited from nasopharyngeal swabs and fulfilled the patient-reported outcome questionnaire. Among them, 46 patients performed psychophysical olfactory evaluation using olfactory identification testing. Based on the duration of the ISOA, 2 groups of patients were compared: patients with olfactory dysfunction duration ≤12 days (group 1) and those with duration >12 days (group 2). Results: In group 1, 42 patients (87.5%) had a positive viral load determined by RT-PCR and 6 patients (12.5%) were negative. In group 2, 7 patients (23%) had a positive viral load and 23 patients (77%) were negative. The psychophysical olfactory evaluation reported that anosmia and hyposmia occurred in 24 (52%) and 11 (24%) patients, respectively. Eleven patients were normosmic. The viral load was significantly higher in patients of group 1 compared with those of group 2. Conclusions: Coronavirus disease 2019 was detected in a high proportion of ISOA patients, especially over the first 12 days of olfactory dysfunction. Anosmia is an important symptom to consider in the detection of COVID-19 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/hypothesis: To investigate clinical and radiological features of olfactory clefts of patients with mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Study Design: Prospective non controlled study.Methods: Sixteen COVID-19 patients were recruited. The epidemiological and clinical data were extracted. Nasal complaints were assessed through the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test. Patients underwent psychophysical olfactory testing, olfactory cleft examination, and computed tomography (CT) scans.Results: Sixteen anosmic patients were included. The mean Sniffin' Sticks score was 4.6 ± 1.7. The majority of patients had no endoscopical abnormality, with a mean olfactory cleft endoscopy score of 0.6 ± 0.9. The olfactory clefts were opacified in three patients on the CT scan. The mean radiological olfactory cleft score was 0.7 ± 0.8. There were no significant correlations between clinical, radiological, and psychophysical olfactory testing.Conclusions: The olfactory cleft of anosmic COVID-19 patients is free regarding endoscopic examination and imaging. The anosmia etiology is not related to edema of the olfactory cleft.Level Of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 130:2526-2531, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• COVID-19 patients with total loss of smell have more olfactory bulb abnormalities at the magnetic resonance imaging than patients without loss of smell. • The olfactory bulb MRI abnormalities may be objectified through a signal intensity ratio measurement that is calculated between the average signals of the olfactory bulb and the frontal white matter. • The loss of smell is probably due to olfactory bulb inflammation related to virus spread. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To investigate olfactory dysfunction (OD) in patients with mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) through patient‐reported outcome questionnaires and objective psychophysical testing. Methods: COVID‐19 patients with self‐reported sudden‐onset OD were recruited. Epidemiological and clinical data were collected. Nasal complaints were evaluated with the sinonasal outcome‐22. Subjective olfactory and gustatory status was evaluated with the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Objective OD was evaluated using psychophysical tests. Results: Eighty‐six patients completed the study. The most common symptoms were fatigue (72.9%), headache (60.0%), nasal obstruction (58.6%), and postnasal drip (48.6%). Total loss of smell was self‐reported by 61.4% of patients. Objective olfactory testings identified 41 anosmic (47.7%), 12 hyposmic (14.0%), and 33 normosmic (38.3%) patients. There was no correlation between the objective test results and subjective reports of nasal obstruction or postnasal drip. Conclusion: A significant proportion of COVID‐19 patients reporting OD do not have OD on objective testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: Persistent olfactory (POD) and gustatory (PGD) dysfunctions are one of the most frequent symptoms of long-Coronavirus Disease 2019 but their effect on the quality of life (QoL) of patients is still largely unexplored. (2) Methods: An online survey was administered to individuals who reported to have had SARS-CoV-2 infection at least 6 months prior with persisting COVID-19 symptoms (using the COVID symptom index), including ratings of POD and PGD, and their physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) components of quality of life were assessed using the standardized short form 12 questionnaire (SF-12). (3) Results: Responses from 431 unique individuals were included in the analyses. The most frequent persistent symptoms were: fatigue (185 cases, 42.9%), olfactory dysfunction (127 cases, 29.5%), gustatory dysfunction (96 cases, 22.3%) and muscle pain (83 cases, 19.3%). Respondents who reported persisting muscle pain, joint pain, fatigue, headache, gastrointestinal disturbances, and dyspnea had significantly worse PCS. Those experiencing persistent fatigue and dyspnea also showed significantly lower MCS. Respondents reporting POD or PGD showed significantly worse QoL, but only pertaining to the MCS. Multiple regressions predicted MCS based on olfactory and marginally on gustatory ratings, but not PCS. Age significantly affected the prediction of PCS but not MCS, and gender and temporal distance from the COVID-19 diagnosis had no effect. (4) Conclusions: POD and PGD are frequent symptoms of the long-COVID-19 syndrome and significantly reduce QoL, specifically in the mental health component. This evidence should stimulate the establishment of appropriate infrastructure to support individuals with persistent CD, while research on effective therapies scales up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: Smell; Taste; Anosmia; Hyposmia; Gustatory; Dysgeusia; Loss; COVID-19; Coronavirus; Dear editor EN Smell Taste Anosmia Hyposmia Gustatory Dysgeusia Loss COVID-19 Coronavirus Dear editor 2397 2398 2 07/07/20 20200801 NES 200801 Jerome R. Lechien and Julien W. Hsieh contributed to the paper and are joint as co-first authors. Dear Editor, We thank Dr Bigiani [[1]] for this letter entitled "Gustatory dysfunctions in COVID-19 patients: possible involvement of taste renin-angiotensin system (RAS)" which is related to our paper [[2]]. References 1 Bigiani A. Gustatory dysfunctions in COVID-19 patients: possible involvement of taste renin-angiotensin system (RAS). [Extracted from the article]

Keywords: Smell; Taste; Anosmia; Hyposmia; Loss; COVID-19; Coronavirus EN Smell Taste Anosmia Hyposmia Loss COVID-19 Coronavirus 2393 2394 2 07/07/20 20200801 NES 200801 Carlos M. Chiesa-Estomba and Sven Saussez equally contributed to the paper and are joint as co-senior authors. Although we acknowledge that large media coverage of these symptoms in the pandemic context may lead to overestimation of self-reported chemosensory loss, we are confident that we used a reliable patient-reported outcome questionnaire to assess the prevalence of self-reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Smell, Taste, Anosmia, Hyposmia, Loss, COVID-19, Coronavirus. [Extracted from the article]

Background: The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of early administration of oral corticosteroids (OC) or nasal corticosteroids (NC) as an add-on to olfactory training (OT) versus OT alone in patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: Patients with a positive diagnosis of COVID-19 and OD were prospectively recruited from March 22 to December 15, 2020 from 4 European hospitals. Patients had confirmed OD on psychophysical testing. All patients undertook OT, with add-on 10 days of OC (group 1: OC + OT), or 1 month of NC (group 2: NC + OT) or olfactory training alone (group 3: OT). Olfactory evaluations (Sniffin'Sticks tests) were carried out at the time of inclusion, 1 and 2 months after the start of the therapeutic course. Results: A total of 152 hyposmic or anosmic patients completed the study. Group 1, 2 and 3 included 59, 22 and 71 patients, respectively and all patient groups were comparable regarding baseline Sniffin'Sticks tests. The median Sniffin'Sticks test values significantly improved from pre- to post-intervention in all groups. The increase of Sniffin'Sticks test values was higher in group 1 (OC + OT) compared with groups 2 and 3 (p < 0.001) at one month after treatment but did not remain so at 2 months. Groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively, presented parosmia in 20/71 (28.2%), 9/22 (40.9%) and 42/71 (59.2%) patients. This difference was statistically significant between group 1 and 3 (p < 0.001). There were no patients with a worsening of the disease or an increase of the severity of the COVID-19 symptoms. Conclusions: The use of OCs in patients with OD related to mild COVID-19 is generally well-tolerated without any case of deterioration of symptoms. OC is associated with greater improvement in psychophysical olfactory evaluations at 1-month post-treatment but there was no difference at 2 months. Parosmia may be reduced following treatment with OC and NC. On the basis of these preliminary results, it is possible to state that considering the 2 months efficacy of OC and NC with respect to the OT alone and the risk-benefit ratio, the benefit to start a specific treatment of COVID-19 related OD cannot be demonstrated and there is a need for a randomised controlled trial to assess this further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objective evaluation of the olfactory function of coronavirus disease 2019 patients is difficult because of logistical and operator-safety problems. For this reason, in the literature, the data obtained from psychophysical tests are few and based on small case series. Methods: A multicenter, cohort study conducted in seven European hospitals between March 22 and August 20, 2020. The Sniffin-Sticks test and the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center orthonasal olfaction test were used to objectively evaluate the olfactory function. Results: This study included 774 patients, of these 481 (62.1%) presented olfactory dysfunction (OD): 280 were hyposmic and 201 were anosmic. There was a significant difference between self-reported anosmia/hyposmia and psychophysical test results (p = 0.006). Patients with gastroesophageal disorders reported a significantly higher probability of presenting hyposmia (OR 1.86; p = 0.015) and anosmia (OR 2.425; p < 0.001). Fever, chest pain, and phlegm significantly increased the likelihood of having hyposmia but not anosmia or an olfactory disturbance. In contrast, patients with dyspnea, dysphonia, and severe-to-critical COVID-19 were significantly more likely to have no anosmia, while these symptoms had no effect on the risk of developing hyposmia or an OD. Conclusions: Psychophysical assessment represents a significantly more accurate assessment tool for olfactory function than patient self-reported clinical outcomes. Olfactory disturbances appear to be largely independent from the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of the patients. The non-association with rhinitis symptoms and the high prevalence as a presenting symptom make olfactory disturbances an important symptom in the differential diagnosis between COVID-19 and common flu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We investigate the prevalence of the self-reported and objective sudden loss of smell (SLS) in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: Severe COVID-19 patients with self-reported SLS were recruited at hospitalization discharge. Epidemiological and clinical data were collected. The Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) was used to evaluate rhinological complaints. Subjective olfactory and gustatory functions were assessed with the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHNES). Objective SLS was evaluated using psychophysical tests. Potential associations between olfactory evaluation and the clinical outcomes (duration of hospitalization; admission biology; one month serology (IgG), and chest computed tomography findings) were studied. Results: Forty-seven patients completed the study (25 females). Subjectively, eighteen (38.3%) individuals self-reported subjective partial or total SLS. Among them, only three and four were anosmic and hyposmic, respectively (38.9%). Considering the objective evaluation in the entire cohort, the prevalence of SLS was 21.3%. Elderly patients and those with diabetes had lower objective olfactory evaluation results than young and non-diabetic individuals. Conclusions: The prevalence of SLS in severe COVID-19 patients appears to be lower than previously estimated in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 forms. Future comparative studies are needed to explore the predictive value of SLS for COVID-19 severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: anosmia; chest CT; coronavirus; COVID-19; hyposmia; olfactory; pneumonia; recovery; SARS-CoV-2; smell EN anosmia chest CT coronavirus COVID-19 hyposmia olfactory pneumonia recovery SARS-CoV-2 smell 103 107 5 12/31/21 20220101 NES 220101 INTRODUCTION The prognostic value of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial, with conflicting reports of the association between OD and COVID-19 severity.1 Many of the prognostic studies published so far have important drawbacks that limit the reliability of the results; most are anamnestic studies that do not formally evaluate olfactory function with risk of recall bias, and use "need for hospitalization" alone to determine COVID-19 severity. Coronavirus, COVID-19, hyposmia, pneumonia, anosmia, chest CT, olfactory, recovery, SARS-CoV-2, smell At baseline, 35 patients (76.1%) had OD: 12 cases of anosmia (26.1%), severe hyposmia in 10 (21.7%), and moderate hyposmia in 13 cases (28.3%). [Extracted from the article]