Search

Objectives: To investigate the prevalence and the evolution of olfactory disorders (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients infected during the first and the second European waves. Methods: From March 2020 to October 2020, COVID-19 patients with OD were recruited and followed over the 12-month post-infection. The following data were collected: demographic, treatments, vaccination status, and olfactory function. Olfaction was assessed with the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire (ODQ), and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. Outcomes were compared between patients of the first wave (group 1: wild/D614G virus) and the second wave (group 2: B.1.1.7. Alpha variant) at 1-, 3- and 12-month post-infection. Results: Sixty patients completed the evaluations accounting for 33 and 27 patients in group 1 and 2, respectively. The 1-month TDI score (23.7 ± 5.3) was significantly lower in group 2 compared to group 1 (29.8 ± 8.7; p = 0.017). Proportion of normosmic patients at 1-month post-infection was significantly higher in group 1 compared to group 2 (p = 0.009). TDI scores only significantly increased from 1- to 3-month post-infection in anosmic and hyposmic patients. Focusing on There was a negative association between the 1-month ODQ and the 1-month TDI (rs = − 0.493; p = 0.012). ODQ was a significant predictor of TDI scores at 3- and 12-month post-infection. The 12-month prevalence of parosmia was 60.6% in group 1 and 42.4% in group 2, respectively. There was no significant influence of oral corticosteroid treatment, adherence to an olfactory training and vaccination status on the olfactory outcomes. Conclusions: Patients of the second wave (Alpha B.1.1.7. variant) reported significant higher proportion of psychophysical test abnormalities at 1-month post-infection than patients infected during the first wave (D614G virus). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection into the olfactory clefts of COVID-19 patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). Methods: From March 2022 to July 2022, COVID-19 patients with persistent OD were consecutively recruited to benefit from PRP injection into the olfactory clefts. Patient pain, annoyance, time of procedure, and adverse events were evaluated. Olfactory function was evaluated at baseline and 2-month post-injection with the olfactory disorder questionnaire (ODQ) and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. Results: Eighty-seven patients with anosmia (N = 30), hyposmia (N = 40), or parosmia (N = 17) with a mean OD duration of 15.7 months completed the evaluations. The PRP injection was successfully performed in all patients with a mean procedure time of 18.4 ± 3.4 min. The adverse events included transient epistaxis (N = 31), parosmia related to xylocaine spray (N = 10), and vasovagal episode (N = 2). The injection procedure was evaluated as somewhat or moderately painful by 41 (47%) and 22 (25%) patients, respectively. Thirty-seven patients were assessed after 2 months post-injection. The mean ODQ and TDI scores significantly improved from baseline to 2-month post-injection (p < 0.01). The olfactory improvement occurred after a mean of 3.6 ± 1.9 weeks. Conclusion: The injection of PRP into the olfactory clefts is safe and associated with adequate patient-reported outcomes. The findings of this preliminary study suggest possible efficacy on subjective and psychophysical evaluations, but future randomized controlled studies are needed to determine the superiority of PRP injection over placebo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To investigate effectiveness of olfactory training (OT) in COVID-19 patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). Methods: From March 2020 to March 2022, COVID-19 patients with OD were prospectively followed in three European medical centers for a period of 18 months. A standardized OT protocol were recommended to patients. Patient-reported outcome questionnaires and psychophysical evaluations were used to evaluate olfaction at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months after the start of OT. The evolution of olfactory outcome was compared according to the adherence to the OT protocol. Results: Fifty-seven patients completed the evaluations. Thirty-two patients fully adhered to the OT, while 25 did not adhere. The psychophysical scores significantly improved from baseline to 6-month post-infection in both groups. In the OT group, the psychophysical scores continued to significantly improve from 6 to 12 months after the start of OT (p = 0.032). The mean duration of OT was 15.4 weeks. The mean delay of patient recovery perception was comparable between groups (27.4 weeks). The occurrence of cacosmia (35.1%) and parosmia (43.9%) throughout the follow-up period was comparable between groups. There proportion of phantosmia was higher in training (34.4%) compared with no-OT (16.0%; p = 0.007) group. The baseline Sniffin'Sticks tests was positively associated with the 6-month Sniffin'Sticks tests (rs = 0.685; p < 0.001) and negatively associated with the time of recovery (rs = − 0.369; p = 0.034). Conclusions: The adherence to an OT protocol was associated with better mid-term improvement of psychophysical scores. Future large-cohort randomized-controlled studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of OT in COVID-19 patients. [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]

Objective: To validate a French version of the Olfactory Disorders Questionnaire (Fr-ODQ). Methods: Patients with olfactory disorder (OD) and controls were enrolled from two medical centers. Individuals completed the Fr-ODQ and the French version of the sinonasal outcome tool-22 (SNOT-22). The extended Sniffin'Sticks procedure was used to test odor Threshold, Discrimination, and Identification (TDI). Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the internal consistency of Fr-ODQ. The reliability and the external validity were evaluated through a test–retest approach and by correlating Fr-ODQ and SNOT-22 scores. Results: Eighty-nine patients with OD and 65 healthy individuals completed the evaluations. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.827, reporting adequate internal consistency. The test–retest reliability was high (rs = 0.944, p = 0.001). The external validity was adequate regarding the significant correlation between Fr-ODQ and SNOT-22 (rs = 0.498; p = 0.001). Patients with OD reported a significant higher score of Fr-ODQ than healthy individuals (p < 0.001), indicating a high internal validity. The baseline Fr-ODQ significantly improved after 3-month olfactory training, which corroborated the improvement of TDI scores. Conclusion: The Fr-ODQ is the first patient-reported outcome questionnaire validated for French speaking patients. Fr-ODQ is reliable and valid for the evaluation of the olfactory dysfunction and the related impact on quality of life of French-speaking patients. [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]