Search

The objective of the study was to assess mortality rates in COVID-19 patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who also requiring mechanical ventilation. The predictors of mortality in this cohort were analysed, and the clinical characteristics recorded.

Olfactory dysfunction (OD) was one of the most common symptom of infection with the Wuhan strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) and could persist for several months after symptom onset. The pathogenesis of prolonged OD remains poorly understood but probably involves sustained viral replication associated with limited mucosal immune response to the virus. This prospective study was conducted to investigate the potential relationship between nasal SARS‐CoV‐2 viral load and antibody levels in patients with loss of smell. One hundred and five patients were recruited 2 weeks after presenting with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 associated OD. Based on the identification sniffing test performed at enrollment, 52 patients were still anosmic or hyposmic and 53 were normosmic. SARS‐CoV‐2 was detectable in nasal wash of about 50% of anosmic and normosmic patients. Higher viral load was detected in anosmic patients with lower levels of SARS‐CoV‐2 specific nasal immunoglobulins (Ig) IgG and IgA. This association was not observed in normosmic patients. No relationship between nasal viral load and antibodies to endemic coronaviruses was observed. SARS‐CoV‐2 replication in the nasal cavity may be promoted by defective mucosal antibody responses in patients with OD. Boosting mucosal immunity may limit nasal SARS‐CoV‐2 replication and thereby help in the control of persistent OD. [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]

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]

Objectives/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlations between the severity and duration of olfactory dysfunctions (OD), assessed with psychophysical tests, and the viral load on the rhino‐pharyngeal swab determined with a direct method, in patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Study design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: Patients underwent psychophysical olfactory assessment with Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center test and determination of the normalized viral load on nasopharyngeal swab within 10 days of the clinical onset of COVID‐19. Results: Sixty COVID‐19 patients were included in this study. On psychophysical testing, 12 patients (20% of the cohort) presented with anosmia, 11 (18.3%) severe hyposmia, 13 (18.3%) moderate hyposmia, and 10 (16.7%) mild hyposmia with an overall prevalence of OD of 76.7%. The overall median olfactory score was 50 (interquartile range [IQR] 30–72.5) with no significant differences between clinical severity subgroups. The median normalized viral load detected in the series was 2.56E+06 viral copies/106 copies of human beta‐2microglobulin mRNA present in the sample (IQR 3.17E+04–1.58E+07) without any significant correlations with COVID‐19 severity. The correlation between viral load and olfactory scores at baseline (R2 = 0.0007; P =.844) and 60‐day follow‐up (R2 = 0.0077; P =.519) was weak and not significant. Conclusions: The presence of OD does not seem to be useful in identifying subjects at risk for being super‐spreaders or who is at risk of developing long‐term OD. Similarly, the pathogenesis of OD is probably related to individual factors rather than to viral load and activity. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:2312–2318, 2021 [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]

Background: From the start of the pandemic, many European otolaryngologists observed an unprecendented number of anosmic patients. Early reports proposed that anosmia could be the first or even the only symptom of COVID-19 infection, prompting calls for self-isolation in affected patients. Methods: In the present article, we review the COVID-19 anosmia literature and try to answer the following two questions: first, why is COVID-19 infection responsible for such a high incidence of anosmia? Second, in patients with more severe forms is anosmia really less prevalent and why? Results: In terms of the etiology of olfactory dysfunction, several hypotheses were proposed at the outset of the pandemic; that olfactory cleft inflammation and obstruction caused a localized conductive loss, that there was injury to the sustentacular supporting cells in the olfactory epithelium or, given the known neurotropic potential of coronavirus, that the virus could invade and damage the olfactory bulb. Olfactory cleft obstruction may contribute to the olfactory dysfunction in some patients, perhaps most likely in those that show very early resolution, it cannot account for the loss in all patients. Moreover, disordered regrowth and a predominance of immature neurons have been shown to be associated with parosmia, which is a common finding amongst patients with Covid-related anosmia. A central mechanism therefore certainly seems to be consistent with the group of patients with more prolonged olfactory deficits. Sustentacular cells showing ACE-2 immunohistochemical expression 200 to 700 times greater than nasal or tracheal epithelia seem to be the main SARS-CoV-2 gateway. As the pathophysiology of COVID-19 anosmia seems to be better understood, the question of why patients with a moderate to severe form of COVID-19 infection have less olfactory involvement remains unresolved. Different potential explanations are discussed in this review. Conclusions : The last 5 months have benefited from great international collaborative research, first highlighting and then proving the value of loss of smell and taste as a symptom of COVID-19. Adoption of loss of smell into the case definition by international public health bodies will facilitate control of disease transmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Acta Oto-Laryngologica is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical features of mild‐to‐moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) in a sample of Italian patients and to investigate the occurrence of smell and taste disorders. Infected individuals with suspected (clinical diagnosis) or laboratory‐confirmed COVID‐19 infection were recruited. Patients completed a survey‐based questionnaire with the aim of assessing their epidemiological and clinical characteristics, general otorhinolaryngological symptoms, and smell and taste disorders. A total of 294 patients with mild‐to‐moderate COVID‐19 completed the survey (147 females). The most prevalent general symptoms included fever, myalgia, cough, and headache. A total of 70.4% and 59.2% of patients reported smell and taste disorders, respectively. A significant association between the two above‐mentioned disorders was found (rs: 0.412; P <.001). Smell disorders occurred before the other symptoms in 11.6% of patients and was not significantly associated with nasal obstruction or rhinorrhea. Interestingly, our statistical analysis did not show any significant difference, either for general symptoms or otorhinolaryngological features, between the clinical diagnosis group and the laboratory‐confirmed diagnosis (polymerase chain reaction) group. The structural equation model confirmed significant standardized paths (P <.05) between general symptoms, comorbidities, and general otorhinolaryngological complaints in the absence of a significant correlation between these elements and smell and taste alterations. The prevalence of smell and taste disorders in mild‐to‐moderate Italian COVID‐19 patients is significant both in suspected and laboratory‐confirmed cases and reveals a strong correlation between these clinical signs regardless of the presence of general or otorhinolaryngological symptoms, such as nasal obstruction or rhinorrhea. Highlights: This study evaluates the clinical features of mild‐to‐moderate COVID‐19 in a sample of adult Italian patients. The structural equation model (SEM) built to examine the clinical characteristics of the infection, confirms significant standardised paths between all the evaluated variables and underlines the absence of a significant correlation between smell and taste disorders and all the other variables. Furthermore, the study reveals a strong correlation between smell and taste alterations with a significant prevalence of these symptoms both in suspected (clinical diagnosis) and laboratory‐confirmed (pcr) cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

Objectives: Assess the predictive accuracy of the WHO COVID-19 severity classification on COVID-19 hospitalized patients. The secondary aim was to compare its predictive power with a new prediction model, named COVID-19 EPI-SCORE, based on a Bayesian network analysis. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a population of 295 COVID-19 RT-PCR positive patients hospitalized at Epicura Hospital Center, Belgium, admitted between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. Results: Our cohort's median age was 73 (62–83) years, and the female proportion was 43%. All patients were classified following WHO severity classification at admission. In total, 125 (42.4%) were classified as Moderate, 69 (23.4%) as Severe, and 101 (34.2%) as Critical. Death proportions through these three classes were 11.2%, 33.3%, and 67.3%, respectively, and the proportions of critically ill patients (dead or needed Invasive Mechanical Ventilation) were 11.2%, 34.8%, and 83.2%, respectively. A Bayesian network analysis was used to create a model to analyze predictive accuracy of the WHO severity classification and to create the EPI-SCORE. The six variables that have been automatically selected by our machine learning algorithm were the WHO severity classification, acute kidney injury, age, Lactate Dehydrogenase Levels (LDH), lymphocytes and activated prothrombin time (aPTT). Receiver Operation Characteristic (ROC) curve indexes hereby obtained were 83.8% and 91% for the models based on WHO classification only and our EPI-SCORE, respectively. Conclusions: Our study shows that the WHO severity classification is reliable in predicting a severe outcome among COVID-19 patients. The addition to this classification of a few clinical and laboratory variables as per our COVID-19 EPI-SCORE has demonstrated to significantly increase its accuracy. [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]