Telemedicine allows quantitative measuring of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19

COVID-19 and anosmia: The story so far

OBJECTIVES

The pandemic has affected over 182 million coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases worldwide. Accumulated evidence indicates that anosmia is one of the significant characteristics of COVID-19 with a high prevalence. However, many aspects of COVID-19-induced anosmia are still far from being fully understood. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent developments in COVID-19-induced anosmia to increase awareness of the condition.

METHODS

A literature search was carried out using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus. We reviewed the latest literature on COVID-19-induced anosmia, including mechanisms of pathogenesis, olfactory testing, anosmia as predictive tool, pathological examinations, imaging findings, affected factors, co-existing diseases, treatments, prognosis, hypothesis theories, and future directions.

RESULTS

The possible pathogenesis of COVID-19-induced anosmia may involve inflammation of the olfactory clefts and damage to the olfactory epithelium or olfactory central nervous system by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The D614G spike variant may also play a role in the increased number of anosmia patients. Anosmia may also be an essential indicator of COVID-19 spread and an early indicator of the effectiveness of political decisions. The occurrence and development of COVID-19-induced anosmia may be influenced by smoking behaviors and underlying diseases such as type 2 diabetes, gastroesophageal disorders, and rhinitis. Most patients with COVID-19-induced anosmia can fully or partially recover their olfactory function for varying durations. COVID-19-induced anosmia can be treated with various approaches such as glucocorticoids and olfactory training.

CONCLUSION

Anosmia is one of the main features of COVID-19 and the underlying disease of the patient may also influence its occurrence and development. The possible pathogenesis of COVID-19-induced anosmia is very complicated, which may involve inflammation of the olfactory clefts and damage to the olfactory epithelium or olfactory central nervous system.

COVID-19 and chronic rhinosinusitis: management and comorbidity - what have we learned?

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 5%-12% of the population worldwide suffer from chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). CRS is defined as a chronic respiratory disease and is considered to be a risk factor for COVID-19 patients.

AREAS COVERED

A non-systematic literature research was conducted on COVID-19 and treatment options for CRSwNP. The latest international publications in medical databases, international guidelines, and the internet were reviewed. Since there were no publications on all aspects of this topic during the pandemic, we included our own experience in this report. Based on the conducted literature research in addition to our previously reported experience, we discuss the treatment of CRSwNP during the COVID-19 pandemic and what can be taken for future pandemics.

EXPERT OPINION

Intranasal corticosteroids remain the standard treatment for CRS in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Indications for surgical treatment of CRS should be critically evaluated and reserved for patients with complications and those with no other treatment options. For this purpose, COVID-19 status should be known if possible and, in case of unclear status (emergency), using appropriate personal protective equipment. Systemic corticosteroids should be avoided were possible. Biological treatment should be continued under careful monitoring in uninfected patients and should be temporarily interrupted during COVID-19 infection.

Positionspapier: ICD-Codierung der chronischen Rhinosinusitis mit Nasenpolypen (CRSwNP) im ICD-10-GM als Grundlage für eine Therapie mit Biologika – Empfehlungen des Ärzteverbandes Deutscher Allergologen (AeDA), der Deutschen Gesellschaft für HNO-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Halschirurgie (DGHNOKHC) und des Deutschen CRS-Registers

Hintergrund Die chronische Rhinosinusitis mit Nasenpolypen (CRSwNP) ist eine multifaktorielle entzündliche Erkrankung der Schleimhäute von Nase und Nasennebenhöhlen. In Deutschland sind 3 verschiedene monoklonale Antikörper für die Indikation „Zusatztherapie zu intranasalen Glukokortikosteroiden für die Behandlung Erwachsener mit schwerer chronischer Rhinosinusitis mit Nasenpolypen“ zugelassen. Um die Verordnung in der zugelassenen Indikation (In-Label) zu dokumentieren, ist neben einer Dokumentation zahlreicher medizinischer Parameter die korrekte Auswahl der ICD-10-GM-Codierung entscheidend. Hierfür existieren in Deutschland bislang keine konsentierten Empfehlungen.

Methoden Basierend auf der internationalen Literatur und bisherigen Erfahrungen werden von einem Expertengremium von AeDA, DGHNO-KHC und Deutschem CRS-Register Codierungsmöglichkeiten von CRS und CRSwNP analysiert und auf dieser Basis eine konsentierte Empfehlung für die ICD-10-GM-Codierung in Deutschland ausgesprochen.

Ergebnis Die Internationale statistische Klassifikation der Krankheiten und verwandter Gesundheitsprobleme ICD-10-GM (International Classification of Diseases, 10. Revision, German Modification) ist die amtliche Klassifikation zur Verschlüsselung von Diagnosen in der ambulanten und stationären Versorgung in Deutschland. Der ICD-10-GM unterscheidet nicht adäquat zwischen heute anerkannten klinischen und immunologischen Differenzierungen der CRSsNP und der CRSwNP. Dennoch wird insbesondere bei indiziertem Einsatz von Biologika in der Therapie der schweren CRSwNP eine möglichst exakte Verschlüsselung mit den Codes J33.8 (im Einzelfall J33.1 oder J33.9) empfohlen.

Schlussfolgerungen Das Verständnis über die immunologischen Grundlagen der CRSwNP eröffnet neue Behandlungsansätze mit monoklonalen Antikörpern für Patienten mit schwerer, unkontrollierter Erkrankung. Hier geben wir Empfehlungen für eine adäquate ICD-10-GM-Codierung in Deutschland.

Prevalence of acute olfactory dysfunction differs between variants of SARS-CoV-2-results from chemosensitive testing in wild type, VOC alpha (B.1.1.7) and VOC delta (B.1617.2)

BACKGROUND

Olfactory dysfunction is one of the leading symptoms of COVID-19. Previous data suggest a different prevalence between the wild type virus and its subsequent variants. Here, we report on a prospective study to psychophysically compare olfactory function in acute SARS-CoV-2 infection between wild type, VOC alpha and VOC delta.

METHODS

SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed by reverse-transcription quantitative real-time PCR and virus variants were differentiated by high-sensitive next-generation sequencing. Home-quarantined were sent a validated and blinded smell identification test. A detailed instruction ensured correct self-administration.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients were included in study. Patients with the wild type of SARS-CoV-2 self-evaluated their olfactory function significant lower on the visual analog score compared patients with the VOCs alpha or delta (4.1 ± 1.5 vs. 6.8 ± 2.9 and 7.3 ± 0.9; p < 0.001). Likewise, a significant difference of the prevalence of psychophysically confirmed hyposmia (wild type: 73%; alpha: 41%; delta 48%; p < 0.01) and smell test score (48 ± 25% vs. 70 ± 23% and 67 ± 18%; p < 0.01) could be seen between wild type on one side and VOCs alpha and delta on the other side.

CONCLUSION

In this study, both self-reports and psychophysical testing revealed a significant higher prevalence of olfactory impairment in the wild type of SARS-CoV-2 compared to the VOCs alpha and delta.

Olfactory and gustatory disorders in COVID-19

Loss of olfaction is one of the symptoms most commonly reported by patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although the spontaneous recovery rate is high, recent studies have shown that up to 7% of patients remain anosmic for more than 12 months after the onset of infection, leaving millions of people worldwide suffering from severe olfactory impairment. Olfactory training remains the first recommended treatment. With the continued lack of approved drug treatments, new therapeutic options are being explored. This article reviews the current state of science on COVID-19-related olfactory disorders, focusing on epidemiology, pathophysiology, cure rates, currently available treatment options, and research on new treatments.

Chronic Rhinosinusitis and COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised awareness about olfactory dysfunction, although a loss of smell was present in the general population before COVID-19. Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common upper airway chronic inflammatory disease that is also one of the most common causes of olfactory dysfunction. It can be classified into different phenotypes (ie, with and without nasal polyps) and endotypes (ie, type 2 and non-type 2 inflammation). However, scientific information regarding CRS within the context of COVID-19 is still scarce. This review focuses on (1) the potential effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection on CRS symptoms, including a loss of smell, and comorbidities; (2) the pathophysiologic mechanisms involved in the olfactory dysfunction; (3) CRS diagnosis in the context of COVID-19, including telemedicine; (4) the protective hypothesis of CRS in COVID-19; and (5) the efficacy and safety of therapeutic options for CRS within the context of COVID-19.

COVID-19 and the resurgence of telehealth in otolaryngology

The objective of this review is to examine the impact of the ongoing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the use of telehealth in Otolaryngology. The use of telemedicine rose dramatically during the pandemic to meet the need for continued patient care while allowing for physical separation of providers and patients. Telemedicine has been used to evaluate patients with a variety of pathologies including dysphonia, vertigo, and anosmia. Innovative use of at-home exams, such as video-otoscopy has aided providers in overcoming challenges associated with a highly specialized physical exam. The use of telemedicine in Otolaryngology will likely remain essential in the post-pandemic era and has promising results for improving clinical efficiency.

Olfactory dysfunction is more severe in wild-type SARS-CoV-2 infection than in the Delta variant (B.1.617.2)

Olfactory dysfunction is common in COVID-19, and sudden-onset dysosmia is an early marker for wild-type SARS-CoV-2 infection. Over 10 000 mutations of SARS-CoV-2 have been registered, with variants of concern (VOC) under particular scrutiny. We report a telemedicine-based, multicentre, prospective cohort study with quantitative olfaction testing comparing 79 patients with a confirmed VOC-Delta (n = 21) or wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 infection. Acute SARS-CoV-2 infection led to significant decrease of olfactory function in both cohorts. A majority of patients suffered from hyposmia or anosmia at inclusion with only 26 individuals performing normosmic. Sniffin'Sticks total scores were significantly higher for VOC-Delta patients at onset of illness, compared to WT patients (p < 0.001). At 4 weeks follow-up, olfaction scores recovered only partially for WT patients, thus odds of recovery were stronger in VOC-Delta patients. Also, subjective self-rating of chemosensory function was lower in WT, compared to VOC-Delta patients. The need for ongoing olfaction studies and their prognosis in SARS-CoV-2 background remains urgent, also in the light of increasing numbers of olfaction-related patient presentations.

Störungen des Riech- und Schmeckvermögens bei COVID-19

Der Verlust des Riechvermögens ist eines der Symptome, die von Patienten mit COVID-19 mit am häufigsten angegeben werden. Obwohl die Spontanheilungsrate hoch ist, haben neuere Studien gezeigt, dass bis zu 7 % der Patienten mehr als zwölf Monate nach Beginn der Infektion anosmisch bleiben, sodass weltweit Millionen von Menschen unter schweren Riechstörungen leiden. Riechtraining ist nach wie vor die erste empfohlene Behandlungsform. Angesichts weiterhin fehlender zugelassener medikamentöser Behandlungsmöglichkeiten werden neue therapeutische Optionen erforscht.

Dieser Artikel gibt einen Überblick über den aktuellen Stand der Wissenschaft zu COVID-19-bedingten Riechstörungen, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf der Epidemiologie, der Pathophysiologie, den Heilungsraten, den derzeit verfügbaren Behandlungsmöglichkeiten und der Forschung zu neuen Behandlungsmethoden liegt.

Zitierweise: Klimek L, Hagemann J, Döge J, Freudelsperger L, Cuevas M, Klimek F, Hummel T. Olfactory and gustatory disorders in COVID-19. Allergo J Int 2022;31:243-50

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40629-022-00216-7

Olfactory recovery following infection with COVID-19: A systematic review

Olfactory loss has been identified as one of the common symptoms related to COVID-19 infection. Although olfactory loss is recognized, our understanding of both the extent of loss and time to olfactory recovery following infection is less well known. Similarly, knowledge of potential impactful patient factors and therapies that influence olfactory recovery is desirable but is not overtly clear in the literature. Our systematic review sought to fill this knowledge gap. We included studies that: involved either an observational or an interventional design that reported data on patients with olfactory dysfunction due to Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) diagnosed COVID-19 infection; and reported data regarding olfactory recovery measured by an objective olfactory test, Likert scale and/or visual analog scale (VAS). The study methods were determined a priori and registered in PROSPERO (Registration Number CRD42020204354). An information specialist searched Medline, Embase, LitCovid and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials up to March 2021, and two reviewers were involved in all aspects of study selection and data collection. After screening 2788 citations, a total of 44 studies of assorted observational designs were included. Patients had undergone objective COVID-19 testing, and most were adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Olfactory recovery was found to occur as early as 7 days, with most patients recovering olfaction within 30 days. Few studies included prolonged follow-up to 6 months or longer duration. Poor olfaction at initial presentation was associated with poor recovery rates. Only a small number of studies assessed olfactory retraining and steroid therapy. Additional trials are underway.

[Dupilumab has an additional benefit in treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps]

BACKGROUND

For patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) which cannot be controlled by continuous therapy with intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) and systemic corticosteroids and/or surgical treatment, there were no approved curative options for a long time. For CRSwNP treatment with T2-addressing biologics is possible. On October 24, 2019, the European Commission granted extended approval for dupilumab as the first biological agent for treatment of insufficiently controlled severe CRSwNP. The Federal Joint Committee (G‑BA) evaluates the benefits of reimbursable drugs with new active ingredients. This includes assessment of the additional benefit and its therapeutic relevance.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed using individual patient data based on two phase III studies. Both studies examined the safety and efficacy of dupilumab as an add-on therapy to INCS for treatment of CRSwNP in adults inadequately controlled with systemic corticosteroids and/or surgery compared to INCS alone.

RESULTS

Based on the present data, the G‑BA decided that there is an indication of a considerable additional benefit of dupilumab compared to mometasone furoate.

CONCLUSION

For patients with severe CRSwNP inadequately controlled with INCS and systemic corticosteroids and/or surgery, there is an indication of a considerable additional benefit for the administration of dupilumab as an add-on therapy to INCS compared to mometasone furoate alone.

Recent advances and developments in COVID-19 in the context of allergic diseases

BACKGROUND

Since the first reports of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, there have been 198 million confirmed cases worldwide as of August 2021. The scientific community has joined efforts to gain knowledge of the newly emerged virus named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the immunopathological mechanisms leading to COVID-19, and its significance for patients with allergies and asthma.

METHODS

Based on the current literature, recent advances and developments in COVID-19 in the context of allergic diseases were reviewed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In this review, we discuss the prevalence of COVID-19 in subjects with asthma, attacks of hereditary angioedema, and other allergic diseases during COVID-19. Underlying mechanisms suggest a protective role of allergy in COVID-19, involving eosinophilia, SARS-CoV-2 receptors expression, interferon responses, and other immunological events, but further studies are needed to fully understand those associations. There has been significant progress in disease evaluation and management of COVID-19, and allergy care should continue during the COVID-19 pandemic. The European Academy of Allergy & Clinical Immunology (EAACI) launched a series of statements and position papers providing recommendations on the organization of the allergy clinic, handling of allergen immunotherapy, asthma, drug hypersensitivity, allergic rhinitis, and other allergic diseases. Treatment of allergies using biologics during the COVID-19 pandemic has also been discussed. Allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines, including severe anaphylaxis, have been reported. Vaccination is a prophylactic strategy that can lead to a significant reduction in the mortality and morbidity associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and in this review, we discuss the proposed culprit components causing rare adverse reactions and recommendations to mitigate the risk of anaphylactic events during the administration of the vaccines.

Praktischer Leitfaden zum Einsatz telemedizinischer Anwendungen bei der Betreuung von Allergiepatienten

Seit Frühjahr 2020 führten die weitreichenden Maßnahmen zur Kontaktbeschränkung im Rahmen der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie auch zu einer Reduktion der Arzt-Patienten-Kontakte im ambulanten Versorgungsbereich. Telemedizinische Anwendungen werden zunehmend eine Möglichkeit darstellen, die Patientenversorgung unter Infektionsschutzmaßnahmen effizient zu gewährleisten. Auch in der Allergologie können telemedizinische wie digitale Anwendungen den klinischen Alltag deutlich erleichtern. Die mit der Implementierung digitaler Strategien verbundenen technischen und rechtlichen Hürden müssen hierfür jedoch generell überwunden werden.

Continuation of telemedicine in otolaryngology post-COVID-19: Applications by subspecialty

Objective

The purpose of this paper is to review the literature and compile key clinically relevant applications of telemedicine for use in otolaryngology relevant to the post-COVID-19 era.

Study design

Systematic Literature Review.

Data sources

Pubmed and Google Scholar.

Review methods

Pubmed and Google Scholar were queried using combined key words such as “telemedicine,” “covid” and “otolaryngology.” The searches were completed in March–August 2020. Additional queries were made with particular subspecialty phrases such as “rhinology” or “otology” to maximize yield of relevant titles. Relevant articles were selected for abstract review. Applicable abstracts were then selected for review of the full text.

Results

Initial search identified 279 results. These were screened for relevance and 100 abstracts were selected for review. Abstracts were excluded if they were not in English, not related to otolaryngology, or if the full text was unavailable for access. Of these, 37 articles were selected for complete review of the full text.

Conclusion

The sudden healthcare closures during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a sharp increase in the use of telemedicine, particularly in subspecialty fields. Otolaryngologists are at a unique risk of infection resulting from the examination of the head and neck and aerosol-generating procedures due to the predilection of viral particles for the nasal cavities and pharynx. The COVID-19 pandemic may have served as a catalyst to implement telemedicine into clinical practice, however identifying ways to integrate telemedicine long term is key for a sustainable and viable practice in the post-COVID-19 era. Although many states are now finding themselves on the down-sloping side of their infection rate curve, many others remain at the apex. Additionally, the risk of future waves of this pandemic, or the onset of another pandemic, should not be overlooked. Practice modification guidelines that mitigate infection risk by utilizing telemedicine would be useful in these instances. Telemedicine can help to reduce infection spread by limiting unnecessary in-person interactions and help conserve personal protective equipment (PPE) by facilitating remote care with the added benefits of expanding care to broad geographic areas, limiting cost, time, and travel burden on patients and families, and enabling consistent follow up.

Telemedicine in allergology: practical aspects: A position paper of the Association of German Allergists (AeDA)

Since spring 2020, the wide-ranging contact restriction measures in the context of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic have also led to a reduction in physician–patient contacts in the ambulatory care setting. Telemedicine applications will increasingly provide a way to efficiently deliver patient care under infection control measures. In allergology, telemedical as well as digital applications can also significantly facilitate everyday clinical practice. However, the technical and legal hurdles associated with the implementation of digital strategies must be overcome for this to happen. The aim of this article is to provide an intuitive overview of the aspects to be considered in the implementation of telemedicine consultations and to highlight the current state of the framework as well as optimization possibilities and perspectives in allergology. If a structured use is guaranteed, digital and telemedical applications can improve patient care—also in allergology. There is potential to be exploited in many areas, from the remote collection of clinical history, and video consultations, to the discussion of diagnostic findings, disease monitoring, and therapy support. The use of telemedical applications, especially video consultations, has experienced a remarkable acceleration in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The present overview of the legal, technical and professional framework is intended to support the anchoring of digital and telemedical technologies in everyday allergology. However, in order to consolidate these in the future, an agreement is needed regarding professional standards of action as well as a remuneration structure that is permanently defined beyond the current pandemic.

COVID-19: Recovery from Chemosensory Dysfunction. A Multicentre study on Smell and Taste

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

With the COVID-19 pandemic, chemosensory dysfunction are among the most prevalent symptoms. Most reports are subjective evaluations, which have been suggested to be unreliable. The objective is to test chemosensory dysfunction and recovery based on extensive psychophysical tests in COVID-19 during the course of the disease.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS

A total of 111 patients from four centers participated in the study. All tested positive for SARS-COV-2 with RT-PCR. They were tested within 3 days of diagnosis and 28 to 169 days after infection. Testing included extensive olfactory testing with the Sniffin' Sticks test for threshold, discrimination and identification abilities, and with the Taste Sprays and Taste Strips for gustatory function for quasi-threshold and taste identification abilities.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in olfactory function during and after infection. During infection 21% were anosmic, 49% hyposmic, and 30% normosmic. After infection only 1% were anosmic, 26% hyposmic, and 73% normosmic. For gustatory function, there was a difference for all taste qualities, but significantly in sour, bitter, and total score. Twenty-six percent had gustatory dysfunction during infection and 6.5% had gustatory dysfunction after infection. Combining all tests 22% had combined olfactory and gustatory dysfunction during infection. After infection no patients had combined dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemosensory dysfunction is very common in COVID-19, either as isolated smell or taste dysfunction or a combined dysfunction. Most people regain their chemosensory function within the first 28 days, but a quarter of the patients show persisting dysfunction, which should be referred to specialist smell and taste clinics for rehabilitation of chemosensory function.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 131:1095-1100, 2021.

Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunctions in COVID-19 Patients: From a Different Perspective

The prevalence of sensory disorders (smell and/or taste) in affected patients has shown a high variability of 5% to 98% during the COVID-19 outbreak, depending on the methodology, country, and study. Loss of smell and taste occurring in COVID-19 cases are now recognized by the international scientific community as being among the main symptoms of the disease. This study investigates loss of smell and taste in outpatients and hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection.

Chemosensory Dysfunction in Patients with COVID-19: What Do We Learn from the Global Outbreak?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chemosensory dysfunction in the patients with COVID-19 has been reported frequently in the studies from different regions of the world. However, the prevalence of smell and/or taste disorders presents significant ethnic and geographic variability. In addition, the pathogenesis of chemosensory dysfunction remains unclarified.

RECENT FINDINGS

This is a narrative review on the recent state of the prevalence, mechanism, and diagnostic and therapeutic strategy of chemosensory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients during the global pandemic. The chemosensory dysfunction was analysis based on recent studies, which either used questionnaires, Likert scales (0-10), or smell tests to estimate the smell and taste dysfunction. The ethnic and geographic difference of the prevalence of smell and/or taste disorders and the potential underlying mechanisms have been discussed. Several suggestions on the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 patients with smell and taste disorders were summarized for the physicians. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current studies regarding the chemosensory dysfunction during the COVID-19 worldwide outbreak.

Advances and recent developments in asthma in 2020

In this review, we discuss recent publications on asthma and review the studies that have reported on the different aspects of the prevalence, risk factors and prevention, mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment of asthma. Many risk and protective factors and molecular mechanisms are involved in the development of asthma. Emerging concepts and challenges in implementing the exposome paradigm and its application in allergic diseases and asthma are reviewed, including genetic and epigenetic factors, microbial dysbiosis, and environmental exposure, particularly to indoor and outdoor substances. The most relevant experimental studies further advancing the understanding of molecular and immune mechanisms with potential new targets for the development of therapeutics are discussed. A reliable diagnosis of asthma, disease endotyping, and monitoring its severity are of great importance in the management of asthma. Correct evaluation and management of asthma comorbidity/multimorbidity, including interaction with asthma phenotypes and its value for the precision medicine approach and validation of predictive biomarkers, are further detailed. Novel approaches and strategies in asthma treatment linked to mechanisms and endotypes of asthma, particularly biologicals, are critically appraised. Finally, due to the recent pandemics and its impact on patient management, we discuss the challenges, relationships, and molecular mechanisms between asthma, allergies, SARS-CoV-2, and COVID-19.

Coronavirus Disease-19 and Rhinology/Facial Plastics

This review summarizes the challenges and adaptations that have taken place in rhinology and facial plastics in response to the ongoing coronavirus disease-19 pandemic. In particular, the prolonged exposure and manipulation of the nasal and oral cavities portend a high risk of viral transmission. We discuss evidence-based recommendations to mitigate the risk of viral transmission through novel techniques and device implementation as well as increasing conservative management of certain pathologies.

The Loss of Smell and Taste in the COVID-19 Outbreak: a Tale of Many Countries

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Olfactory dysfunction in upper airway viral infections (common cold, acute rhinosinusitis) is common (> 60%). During the COVID-19 outbreak, frequency of sensory disorders (smell and/or taste) in affected patients has shown a high variability from 5 to 98%, depending on the methodology, country, and study.

RECENT FINDINGS

A sudden, severe, isolated loss of smell and/or taste, in the absence of other upper airway inflammatory diseases (allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, nasal polyposis), should alert individuals and physicians on being potentially affected by COVID-19. The evaluation of smell/taste disorders with a visual analogue scale or an individual olfactory or gustatory test, at the hospital or by telemedicine, to prevent contamination might facilitate an early detection of infected patients and reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. During the COVID-19 outbreak, patients with sudden loss of smell should initiate social distancing and home isolation measures and be tested for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test when available. Olfactory training is recommended when smell does not come back after 1 month but can be started earlier.