Search

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]

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]

Background and purpose: The aim was to evaluate potential predictive factors of smell recovery in a clinical series of 288 patients presenting olfactory dysfunction (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Potential correlations were sought between epidemiological, clinical and immunological characteristics of patients and the persistence of OD at 60 days. Methods: COVID‐19 positive patients presenting OD were prospectively recruited from three European hospitals. Baseline clinical and olfactory evaluations were performed within the first 2 weeks after OD onset and repeated at 30 and 60 days. In a subgroup of patients, anti‐severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) antibodies were measured in serum, saliva and nasal secretions at 60 days. Results: A total of 288 COVID‐19 patients with OD were included in the study. Two weeks after the onset of the loss of smell, 52.4% of patients had OD on psychophysical tests, including 113 cases (39.2%) of anosmia and 38 cases (13.2%) of hyposmia. At 60‐day follow‐up, 25.4% of the patients presented persistent OD. There was no significant correlation between sex, age, viral load on nasopharyngeal swab or COVID‐19 severity and poor olfactory outcome. In a subgroup of 63 patients, it was demonstrated that patients with poor olfactory outcomes at 60 days had lower levels of salivary and nasal immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgG1, but similar levels of antibodies in the serum. Conclusions: No clinical markers predicted the evolution of OD at 60 days. Patients with poor olfactory outcome at 60 days had lower saliva and nasal antibodies, suggesting a role for local immune responses in the persistence of COVID‐19 related OD. [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]

(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; 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]

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]