Prevalence of Persistent Olfactory Disorders in Patients With COVID-19: A Psychophysical Case-Control Study With 1-Year Follow-up

Recovery rates of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction using psychophysical assessment: A longitudinal cohort study

Objectives

Persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD) following loss of smell associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection is a major feature of long COVID. Perspectives on the prevalence of persistent OD predominantly rely on self-reported olfactory function. Few studies have tracked longitudinal rates of recovery using psychophysical assessment among patients presenting for evaluation of persistent OD beyond a window of acute recovery. Data anchored in standardized testing methods are needed to counsel patients who fail to acutely regain their sense of smell. This study aims to quantify the degree of persistent OD in post-COVID-19 patients who experience subjective and psychophysical OD.

Methods

We grouped participants presenting for OD evaluation into cohorts based on both subjective and psychophysical olfactory status at a baseline assessment and assessed their olfactory abilities with a visual analogue scale and the Sniffin' Sticks extended test at baseline and 1-year time points. Participants had confirmed a history of COVID-19 by lab evaluation or clinical diagnosis if lab evaluation was not available.

Results

Baseline olfactory evaluation was completed by 122 participants, 53 of whom completed the 1-year follow-up assessment. Among participants presenting with perceived OD, 74.5% had confirmed psychophysical OD at baseline, with 55.1% at 1-year follow-up. Participants had reliable trends in self-rated versus psychophysically tested olfactory function at both time points. The total threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) score improved by +3.25 points in the cohort with psychophysical OD (p = 0.0005), with this improvement largely attributable to an increase in median threshold scores (+2.75 points; p = 0.0004).

Conclusions

OD persists in a significant number of patients who fail to acutely recovery their sense of smell after COVID-19, with many demonstrating lingering deficits at 1-year. Improvements in threshold, but not discrimination or identification, most significantly mediate improvement of total TDI score at follow-up.

Treatment of Olfactory Disorders After SARS - CoViD 2 Virus Infection

OBJECTIVE

The benefit of a nasal corticosteroid in the treatment of persistent post-infectious smell disorders is not as clear in previous studies as is assumed for olfactory training. This study would therefore like to describe the treatment strategies using the example of a persistent olfactory dysfunction as a result of a proven infection with SARS-CoViD-2-virus.

METHODS

Twenty patients (average age of 33.9 ± 11.9 years) with hyposmia were included in this study from December 2020 to July 2021. Every second patient received additionally a nasal corticosteroid. The two resulting randomized groups of equal size were screened with the TDI test, a 20-item taste powder test for the assessment of retronasal olfaction and otorhinolaryngological examination. The patients were asked to train twice daily using a standardized odor training kit and followed up after 2 months and 3 months, respectively.

RESULTS

We documented a significant overall improvement in olfactory ability over the investigation period in both groups. While the TDI score steadily increased on average under the combination therapy, the rise under olfactory training alone was initially steeper. This short-term interaction effect over mean two months was not statistically significant. According to Cohen, however, a moderate effect (eta2 = 0.055, Cohen`s d = 0.5) can still be assumed. This effect could be explained by a possibly higher compliance at the beginning of the sole olfactory training due to the lack of further drug treatment offers. When the training intensity decreases, the recovery of the sense of smell stagnates. Adjunctive therapy ultimately outweighs this short-term benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

The results reinforce the recommendation of early and consistent olfactory training on patients with dysosmia due to COVID-19. For continuous improvement of the sense of smell, an accompanying topical treatment seems at least to be worth consideration. The results should be optimized with larger cohorts and using new objective olfactometric methods.

Giving a Voice to Patients With Smell Disorders Associated With COVID-19: Cross-Sectional Longitudinal Analysis Using Natural Language Processing of Self-Reports

BACKGROUND

Smell disorders are commonly reported with COVID-19 infection. The smell-related issues associated with COVID-19 may be prolonged, even after the respiratory symptoms are resolved. These smell dysfunctions can range from anosmia (complete loss of smell) or hyposmia (reduced sense of smell) to parosmia (smells perceived differently) or phantosmia (smells perceived without an odor source being present). Similar to the difficulty that people experience when talking about their smell experiences, patients find it difficult to express or label the symptoms they experience, thereby complicating diagnosis. The complexity of these symptoms can be an additional burden for patients and health care providers and thus needs further investigation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore the smell disorder concerns of patients and to provide an overview for each specific smell disorder by using the longitudinal survey conducted in 2020 by the Global Consortium for Chemosensory Research, an international research group that has been created ad hoc for studying chemosensory dysfunctions. We aimed to extend the existing knowledge on smell disorders related to COVID-19 by analyzing a large data set of self-reported descriptive comments by using methods from natural language processing.

METHODS

We included self-reported data on the description of changes in smell provided by 1560 participants at 2 timepoints (second survey completed between 23 and 291 days). Text data from participants who still had smell disorders at the second timepoint (long-haulers) were compared with the text data of those who did not (non-long-haulers). Specifically, 3 aims were pursued in this study. The first aim was to classify smell disorders based on the participants' self-reports. The second aim was to classify the sentiment of each self-report by using a machine learning approach, and the third aim was to find particular food and nonfood keywords that were more salient among long-haulers than those among non-long-haulers.

RESULTS

We found that parosmia (odds ratio [OR] 1.78, 95% CI 1.35-2.37; P<.001) as well as hyposmia (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.34-2.26; P<.001) were more frequently reported in long-haulers than in non-long-haulers. Furthermore, a significant relationship was found between long-hauler status and sentiment of self-report (P<.001). Finally, we found specific keywords that were more typical for long-haulers than those for non-long-haulers, for example, fire, gas, wine, and vinegar.

CONCLUSIONS

Our work shows consistent findings with those of previous studies, which indicate that self-reports, which can easily be extracted online, may offer valuable information to health care and understanding of smell disorders. At the same time, our study on self-reports provides new insights for future studies investigating smell disorders.

Validity and reliability of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders for Italian-speaking patients with olfactory dysfunction

Objective

To translate and validate an Italian version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (IT-QOD).

Materials and methods

This is a prospective, multicentre study that involved patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD). Both cases and controls underwent administration of the IT-QOD, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) and psychophysical evaluation of orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function.

Results

The IT-QOD was administered to 96 patients and 38 controls. The Cronbach's alpha exceeded 0.90, indicating satisfactory internal consistency. The test-retest reliability was found to be high for both parosmia (rs = 0.944) and life quality (rs = 0.969). Patients with OD had significantly higher IT-QOD scores compared to healthy individuals (p < 0.001), indicating strong internal validity. The external validity was also satisfactory, as shown by the significant correlation with SNOT-22 (rs = -0.54) and the threshold, discrimination, and identification score (rs = -0.63).

Conclusions

The IT-QOD was demonstrated to be reliable and valid to assess the impact of OD on the quality of life of Italian-speaking patients.

Long COVID-associated symptoms prevalent in both SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative individuals: A prospective follow-up study

Background

Research into persistent symptoms among SARS-CoV-2-positive i.e. CoV(+) patients mostly focuses on hospitalized individuals. Our prospective follow-up study compares long COVID-associated symptoms among laboratory-confirmed CoV(+) and SARS-CoV-2 negative [CoV(-)] individuals.

Methods

SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR-tested volunteers were recruited into four cohorts: 1) CoV(+) outpatients, 2) CoV(-) outpatients, 3) CoV(+) intensive care unit (ICU) inpatients, and 4) CoV(+) non-ICU inpatients. Neutralizing antibodies were assessed and questionnaires filled in at enrolment and days 90-120, 121-180, 181-270, 271-365, and 365-533.

Results

Of the 1326 participants, 1191 were CoV(+): 46 ICU, 123 non-ICU, and 1022 outpatients; 135 were CoV(-) outpatient controls. Both CoV(+) outpatients and CoV(-) controls showed high overall symptom rates at all time points. More prevalent among CoV(+) than CoV(-) outpatients were only impaired olfaction and taste; many others proved more frequent for CoV(-) participants. At ≥181 days, fatigue, dyspnoea, various neuropsychological symptoms and several others were recorded more often for CoV(+) inpatients than outpatients.

Conclusions

Long COVID-associated symptoms were more frequent among hospitalized than non-hospitalized CoV(+) participants. As for outpatients, only impaired olfaction and taste showed higher rates in the CoV(+) group; some symptoms proved even more common among those CoV(-). Besides suggesting low long COVID prevalences for outpatients, our results highlight the weight of negative controls.

Olfactory recovery following omicron variant infection: a psychophysical prospective case-control study with six-month follow up

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the recovery of olfactory function at six months in individuals infected with the coronavirus disease 2019 omicron variant, using psychophysical tests.

METHODS

A prospective case-control study that included severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 patients infected in February and March 2022 was conducted. Patients underwent the Sniffin' Sticks test within 10 days of infection and again after at least 6 months. The olfactory scores were compared with those of a control group.

RESULTS

In all, 102 patients and 120 controls were enrolled in the study. At baseline, 26 patients (25.5 per cent) self-reported smell loss. The median threshold, discrimination and identification score was 33.6 (interquartile range, 12.5) for the cases and 36.5 (interquartile range, 4.38) for the controls (p < 0.001). Based on the threshold, discrimination and identification scores, 12 controls and 34 patients reported olfactory dysfunction (p < 0.001). Eighty cases underwent re-evaluation at six months; the median threshold, discrimination and identification score was 37.1 (interquartile range, 4.75) with no significant differences compared with the controls.

CONCLUSION

Six months after infection, the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in patients did not differ significantly from the control population.

Psychophysical assessment of olfactory and gustatory function in post-mild COVID-19 patients: A matched case-control study with 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to psychophysically evaluate the prevalence of smell and taste dysfunction 2 years after mildly symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection compared to that observed at 1-year follow-up and while considering the background of chemosensory dysfunction in the no-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) population.

METHOD

This is a prospective case-control study on 93 patients with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection and 93 matched controls. Self-reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunction was assessed by 22-item Sino-Nasal-Outcome Test (SNOT-22), item "Sense of smell or taste." Psychophysical orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function and gustatory performance were estimated using the extended Sniffin' Sticks test battery, 20 powdered tasteless aromas, and taste strips test, respectively. Nasal trigeminal sensitivity was assessed by sniffing a 70% solution of acetic acid.

RESULTS

The two psychophysical assessments of chemosensory function took place after a median of 409 days (range, 366-461 days) and 765 days (range, 739-800 days) from the first SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, respectively. At 2-year follow-up, cases exhibited a decrease in the prevalence of olfactory (27.9% vs. 42.0%; absolute difference, -14.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -21.8% to -2.6%; p = 0.016) and gustatory dysfunction (14.0% vs. 25.8%; absolute difference, -11.8%; 95% CI, -24.2% to 0.6%; p = 0.098). Subjects with prior COVID-19 were more likely than controls to have an olfactory dysfunction (27.9% vs. 10.8 %; absolute difference, 17.2%; 95% CI, 5.2% to 28.8%) but not gustatory dysfunction (14.0% vs. 9.7%; absolute difference, 4.3%; 95% CI, -5.8% to 14.4% p = 0.496) still 2 years after the infection. Overall, 3.2% of cases were still anosmic 2 years after the infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a proportion of subjects recovered from long-lasting smell/taste dysfunction more than 1 year after COVID-19, cases still exhibited a significant excess of olfactory dysfunction 2 years after SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared to matched controls.

Persistent post-COVID-19 dysosmia: Practices survey of members of the French National Union of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Specialists. CROSS analysis

INTRODUCTION

Persistent dysosmia more than 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19) is considered as long-COVID olfactory disease (LCOD). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic and therapeutic management of LCOD in the daily clinical practice of members of the National Union of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Specialists (Syndicat national des médecins spécialisés en ORL et chirurgie cervico-faciale) (SNORL). The secondary objective was to identify factors influencing management within the descriptive survey data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was designed (GoogleForm®) and e-mailed to all 715 SNORL members in January 2022.

RESULTS

The response rate was 7.4% (n=53/715). In total, 94.3% of respondents (n=50) had managed LCOD cases, and 56% (n=28) used psychophysical olfactory tests. Specific olfactory medical therapy involved local corticosteroid nasal sprays in 49.1% of cases (n=26) and oral corticosteroids in 32.1% (n=17). Olfactory self-training was prescribed by 81.1% of respondents, with associated speech pathologist therapy in 15.1% (n=8) of cases. No predictive factors for specific management were identified.

CONCLUSION

Olfactometry is currently under-applied. Consistent with guidelines, non-drug therapy (olfactory training) is the first-line treatment for LCOD.

Post-viral olfactory loss and parosmia

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has brought olfactory dysfunction to the forefront of public awareness, because up to half of infected individuals could develop olfactory dysfunction. Loss of smell-which can be partial or total-in itself is debilitating, but the distortion of sense of smell (parosmia) that can occur as a consequence of a viral upper respiratory tract infection (either alongside a reduction in sense of smell or as a solo symptom) can be very distressing for patients. Incidence of olfactory loss after SARS-CoV-2 infection has been estimated by meta-analysis to be around 50%, with more than one in three who will subsequently report parosmia. While early loss of sense of smell is thought to be due to infection of the supporting cells of the olfactory epithelium, the underlying mechanisms of persistant loss and parosmia remain less clear. Depletion of olfactory sensory neurones, chronic inflammatory infiltrates, and downregulation of receptor expression are thought to contribute. There are few effective therapeutic options, so support and olfactory training are essential. Further research is required before strong recommendations can be made to support treatment with steroids, supplements, or interventions applied topically or injected into the olfactory epithelium in terms of improving recovery of quantitative olfactory function. It is not yet known whether these treatments will also achieve comparable improvements in parosmia. This article aims to contextualise parosmia in the setting of post-viral olfactory dysfunction, explore some of the putative molecular mechanisms, and review some of the treatment options available.

In reference to Intranasal Corticosteroid Treatment on Recovery of Long-Term Olfactory Dysfunction Due to COVID-19

This is a commentary on the article by Hosseinpoor et al. Laryngoscope, 2022

SARS-CoV-2 Effects on Psychophysical Olfactory Scores: Prospective Study With Evaluation Before and 60-Days After Infection

The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the olfactory function in a series of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 and who had undergone psychophysical olfactory assessment prior to infection. Individuals unexposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent a psychophysical evaluation of smell with the Sniffin' Sticks test. The subjects were followed prospectively and included in the study if they developed SARS-CoV-2 infection with a second test 60 days after recovery. At the 60-day follow-up of the 41 included subjects, 2 (4.9%) self-reported persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). The differences between TDI scores before and after infection were statistically significant (37 [interquartile range (IQR), 34.25-39.25] vs 34.75 [IQR, 32.25-38]; p = .021). Analyzing the individual olfactory domains, the differences were significant for threshold (T) (9.75 [IQR, 9-11.25] vs 8.25 [IQR, 7.25-10.25]; p = .009) but not for odor discrimination (D) (p = .443) and identification (I) (p = .159). SARS-CoV-2 causes a significant reduction in the olfactory function, in particular affecting the olfactory threshold, even in subjects who do not self-report an OD.

Prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in D614G, alpha, delta and omicron waves: a psychophysical case-control study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction (OD) at different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic by evaluating subjects diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron wave with psychophysical tests and comparing the results with those obtained from patients infected during the D614G, Alpha and Delta waves and with those of a control group.

METHODOLOGY

The study included adult patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Depending on the time of diagnosis, the subjects were divided into four study groups: D614G; Alpha, Delta and Omicron variant groups. A group of uninfected individuals was used as control. All subjects underwent psychophysical evaluation of the olfactory function with the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center olfactory test (D614G and Alpha groups) or the extended version of the Sniffin'Sticks test (Delta, Omicron and control groups).

RESULTS

372 cases (134 D614G group, 118 Alpha group, 32 in Delta group and 88 Omicron group) were recruited and evaluated within 10 days of infection, alongside 80 controls. Patients self-reported olfactory loss in 72.4% of cases in the D614G group, in 75.4% of cases in the Alpha group, in 65.6% of cases in the Delta group and in 18.1% in the Omicron group. Psychophysical evaluation revealed a prevalence of OD: 80.6%, 83.0%, 65.6% and 36.3% in the D614G, Alpha, Delta and Omicron group respectively. The differences between the D614G, Alpha and Delta groups were not statistically significant. The Omicron group demonstrated a significantly lower prevalence of OD than the other variants but still significantly higher than the controls.

CONCLUSIONS

During the Omicron wave OD was less prevalent than during the D614G, Alpha and Delta periods. One-third of patients have reduced olfactory function on psychophysical evaluation during the Omicron wave. Our results should be considered with caution as the VOC has not been determined with certainty.

Therapies for COVID-19-Related Persistent Olfactory Disorders: One of the Good Fruits of the Pandemic

At the beginning of 2021, the scientific community realized the burden of COVID-19-related persistent olfactory disorders (ODs). The percentage of those infected with COVID-19 who developed severe and persistent ODs [1-3] with devastating effects on their quality of life was 5 to 40% [4,5].

Prevalence and 24-month recovery of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: A multicentre prospective study

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 (r_s = 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.

Usefulness, acceptation and feasibility of electronic medical history tool in reflux disease

OBJECTIVES

To investigate usefulness, feasibility, and patient satisfaction of an electronic pre-consultation medical history tool (EPMH) in laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) work-up.

METHODS

Seventy-five patients with LPR were invited to complete electronic medical history assessment prior to laryngology consultation. EPMH collected the following parameters: demographic and epidemiological data, medication, medical and surgical histories, diet habits, stress and symptom findings. Stress and symptoms were assessed with perceived stress scale and reflux symptom score. Duration of consultation, acceptance, and satisfaction of patients (feasibility, usefulness, effectiveness, understanding of questions) were evaluated through a 9-item patient-reported outcome questionnaire.

RESULTS

Seventy patients completed the evaluation (93% participation rate). The mean age of cohort was 51.2 ± 15.6 years old. There were 35 females and 35 males. Patients who refused to participate (N = 5) were > 65 years old. The consultation duration was significantly lower in patients who used the EPMH (11.3 ± 2.7 min) compared with a control group (18.1 ± 5.1 min; p = 0.001). Ninety percent of patients were satisfied about EPMH easiness and usefulness, while 97.1% thought that EPMH may improve the disease management. Patients would recommend similar approach for otolaryngological or other specialty consultations in 98.6% and 92.8% of cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of EPMH is associated with adequate usefulness, feasibility, and satisfaction outcomes in patients with LPR. This software is a preliminary step in the development of an AI-based diagnostic decision support tool to help laryngologists in their daily practice. Future randomized controlled studies are needed to investigate the gain of similar approaches on the traditional consultation format.

Parosmia as a predictor of a better olfactory function in COVID-19: a multicentric longitudinal study for upper respiratory tract infections

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the course of olfactory dysfunction [OD] due to upper respiratory tract infections [URTI] especially for COVID-19 [C19] in a multicentric design and to investigate possible predictors for the outcome.

METHODS

In a multicentric study, patients (n = 147, of which 96 were women) with OD due to URTI, including C19 and non-C19 were evaluated at two visits with a standardized medical history and "Sniffin' Sticks" extended psychophysical testing to examine the course and possible predictors for improvement of olfactory function.

RESULTS

C19 patients showed better overall olfactory function (p < 0.001) compared to non-C19. Olfactory function (p < 0.001) improved over 3.5 ± 1.2 months in a comparable fashion for C19 and non-C19 comparable over time (p = 0.20) except for a more pronounced improvement of odour threshold (p = 0.03) in C19. C19 patients with parosmia exhibited a higher probability of clinically relevant improvement of odour threshold, a better threshold in the second visit, and tended to have a better TDI-score at the second visit. Further possible predictors for an improving olfactory function were younger age, female gender, and had lower scores in olfactory tests at the first visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with C19 and non-C19 URTI exhibit a similar improvement over 3-4 months except for the odour threshold, with a better TDI in both visits for C19. For C19 a better prognosis in terms of olfactory recovery was found for younger patients with parosmia and lower olfactory scores at the first visit. Still, for many patients with olfactory loss, an improvement that is experienced as complete may only occur over months and possibly years.

The Trajectories of Olfactory Dysfunction from the First to the Omicron Wave: Are We Getting over it?

It has now been two years since the publication in Pathogens of our European multicenter study on the prevalence of olfactory dysfunctions (OD) during COVID-19 [...].

Insight into the mechanisms of olfactory dysfunction by COVID-19

One of the unique symptoms of COVID-19 is chemosensory dysfunction. Almost three years since the beginning of the pandemic of COVID-19, there have been many studies on the symptoms, progress, and possible causes, and also studies on methods that may facilitate recovery of the senses. Studies have shown that some people recover their senses even within a couple of weeks whereas there are other patients that fail to recover chemosensory functions fully for several months and some never fully recover. Here we summarize the symptoms and the progress, and then review the papers on the causation as well as the treatments that may help facilitate the recovery of the symptoms. Depending on the differences in the levels of severity and the locations where the main pathological venues are, what is most effective in facilitating recovery can vary largely across patients and thus may require individualized strategies for each patient. The goal of this paper is to provide some thoughts on these choices depending on the differences in the causes and severity.

Post-Viral Olfactory Loss: What We Learned from the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Viral infections have always been one of the most frequent causes of persistent olfactory dysfunctions accounting for 18% to 45% of all cases [...].

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Olfactory dysfunction is a common consequence of COVID-19 infection and persistent symptoms can have a profound impact on quality of life. At present there is little guidance on how best to treat this condition. A variety of interventions have been suggested to promote recovery, including medication and olfactory training. However, it is uncertain whether any intervention is of benefit. This is an update of the 2021 review with one additional study added.  OBJECTIVES: 1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection.  2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021.   SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance that had persisted for at least four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies with 30 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant and palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin.  Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 18 participants who had anosmia for at least 30 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 15-day course of oral corticosteroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 40 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. Palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 12 participants who had anosmia or hyposmia for at least 90 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 30-day course of palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 30 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.

Olfactory Training in Post-COVID-19 Persistent Olfactory Disorders: Value Normalization for Threshold but Not Identification

(1) Background: Persistent post-viral olfactory disorders (PPVOD) are estimated at 30% of patients one year after COVID-19 infection. No treatment is, to date, significantly effective on PPVOD with the exception of olfactory training (OT). The main objective of this work was to evaluate OT efficiency on post-COVID-19 PPVOD. (2) Methods: Consecutive patients consulting to the ENT department with post-COVID-19 PPVOD were included after completing clinical examination, the complete Sniffin’ Stick Test (TDI), the short version of the Questionnaire of olfactory disorders and the SF-36. Patients were trained to practice a self-olfactory training with a dedicated olfactory training kit twice a day for 6 months before returning to undergo the same assessments. (3) Results: Forty-three patients were included and performed 3.5 months of OT in average. We observed a significant TDI score improvement, increasing from 24.7 (±8.9) before the OT to 30.9 (±9.8) (p < 0.001). Based on normative data, a significant increase in the number of normosmic participants was observed only for the threshold values (p < 0.001). Specific and general olfaction-related quality of life improved after the OT. (4) Conclusions: Olfactory function appeared to improve only in peripheral aspects of post-COVID-19 PPVOD after OT. Future controlled studies must be performed to confirm the OT role and justify new therapeutic strategies that may focus on the central aspects of post-COVID-19 PPVOD.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux may be acute, recurrent or chronic disease: preliminary observations

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the mid-to-long-term symptom evolution and treatment findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) patients.

METHODS

Patients with LPR and treated between September 2016 and December 2017 were prospectively followed. The diagnosis consisted of > 1 pharyngeal event at the hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring. The treatment consisted of 3- to 9-months diet, stress management and medication according to the type of LPR. Reflux symptom score was used to assess the therapeutic response. Patients were surveyed yearly to know the reflux evolution, the potential recurrence(s) of symptoms, and the approaches used to control the disease.

RESULTS

A total of 77 patients completed the evaluations (45 females). The initial treatment duration was 3, 6, or 9 months in 25 (32.5%), 23 (29.9%), and 6 (7.7%) cases before weaning, respectively. Twenty-three patients (29.9%) reported chronic course of the disease. According to the reduction of reflux symptom score, symptoms did not change in 11 (14.3%) patients, while the rest of the patients reported symptom reduction or relief (responder rate of 85.7%). Over time, LPR symptoms never relapsed in 31% of cases, while 38% of patients reported one or several recurrences a year. The recurrence episodes of patients were all adequately treated with medication or diet and did not require long-term medication.

CONCLUSION

Chronic course of the disease was observed in 31% of patients who required long-term medication. Preliminary observations reported that LPR may be classified as acute, recurrent, or chronic disease. The medication weaning is possible in most patients, leading to reduction of cost burden related to LPR treatment.

Results from psychophysical tests of smell and taste during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a review

Only a few studies have assessed smell and taste in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with psychophysical tests, while the majority performed self-rating evaluations. Given the heterogeneity of the published literature, the aim of this review was to systematically analyse the articles on this topic with a focus on psychophysical testing. A search on PubMed and Web of Science from December 2019, to November 2021, with cross-references, was executed. The main eligibility criteria were English-language articles, investigating the clinical features of olfaction and gustation in COVID-19 patients using self-rating assessment, psychophysical testing and imaging techniques. A total of 638 articles were identified and 66 were included. Self-rating assessment was performed in 31 studies, while psychophysical testing in 30 and imaging techniques in 5. The prevalence of chemosensory dysfunction was the most investigated topic, followed by the recovery time. About the psychophysical assessment, the extended version of the Sniffin’ Sticks was used in 11 articles and the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center test in another 11. The olfactory threshold performance was the most impacted compared to the discrimination and identification capacities in accordance with the hypothesis of a tropism of SARS-CoV-2 for the olfactory mucosa. The timing significantly influenced the results of the psychophysical testing with 20% of patients presenting olfactory dysfunction at one month after infection.

The Short- and Long-Term Clinical, Radiological and Functional Consequences of COVID-19

As with the rapid increase of the number of patients who have recovered from COVID-19 globally, there needs to be a major shift of the focus from rapid pathogen detection, treatment and prevention to the promotion of better recovery. Notwithstanding the scarcity of our understandings, recent studies have unraveled a plethora of pulmonary and systemic consequences which require medical attention. These consequences remained as of the end of follow-up which ranged from 1 month to 1 year. Here, we review the consequences of COVID-19 in terms of the residual symptoms, radiological and functional manifestations, and identify the potential risk factors that contribute to a prolonged recovery. We also summarize the benefits of clinical interventions (particularly the pulmonary rehabilitation program), and address several undetermined concerns and key future research directions.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related smell and taste impairment with widespread diffusion of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant

Background

The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of self‐reported chemosensory dysfunction in a study cohort of subjects who developed a mild‐to‐moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) in the period from January 17, 2022, to February 4, 2022 (Omicron proxy period) and compared that with a historical series of patients testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome–coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection between March and April, 2020 (comparator period).

Methods

Prospective study based on the 22‐item Sino‐Nasal Outcome Tool (SNOT‐22), item “sense of smell or taste” and additional outcomes.

Results

Patients’ characteristics and clinical presentations of COVID‐19 were evaluated and compared in 779 patients, 338 of the study cohort and 441 of the historical series. The prevalence of self‐reported chemosensory dysfunction during the proxy Omicron period (32.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 27.6–37.8) was significantly lower from that during the comparator period (66.9%; 95% CI, 62.3–71.3) (p < 0.001). Nearly one‐quarter of patients (24.6%; 95% CI, 20.1–29.5) reported an altered sense of smell during the proxy Omicron period compared to 62.6% (95% CI, 57.9–67.1) during the comparator period (p < 0.001). Similarly, the prevalence of an altered sense of taste dropped to 26.9% (95% CI, 22.3–32.0) during the proxy Omicron period from 57.4% (95% CI, 52.6–62.0) during the comparator period (p < 0.001). The severity of chemosensory dysfunction was lower in the proxy Omicron period compared to the comparator period (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The prevalence and the severity of COVID‐19–associated smell and taste dysfunction has dropped significantly with the advent of the Omicron variant but it still remains above 30%.

Acoustic measurements are useful therapeutic indicators of patients with dysphonia-related to reflux

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to study the usefulness of acoustic measurements as therapeutic outcomes for patients with dysphonia related to laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

METHODS

From September 2019 to April 2021, 120 patients with LPR at the hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance pH-monitoring (HEMII-pH) were prospectively recruited from three University Hospitals. They were divided in two groups regarding the presence of dysphonia. The treatment consisted of a combination of diet, proton-pump inhibitors, magaldrate and alginate for 3-6 months. The following clinical and acoustic evaluations were studied regarding groups at baseline, 3- and 6-month posttreatment: reflux symptom score (RSS), reflux sign assessment (RSA), percent jitter, percent shimmer and noise-to-harmonic ratio (NHR).

RESULTS

A total of 109 patients completed the evaluations, accounting for 49 dysphonic and 60 non-dysphonic individuals. HEMII-pH, gastrointestinal endoscopy, baseline clinical and acoustic features were comparable between groups. RSS and RSA significantly improved from pre- to 3-month posttreatment in both groups. Jitter, Shimmer and NHR significantly improved from pre- to 3-month posttreatment in dysphonic patients, without additional 3- to 6-month posttreatment changes. Acoustic parameters did not change throughout treatment in patients without dysphonia.

CONCLUSION

Acoustic measurements may be an interesting indicator of treatment in LPR patients who reported dysphonia. In this group of individuals, the evolution of acoustic parameters was consistent with the evolution of symptoms and findings.

Self-reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in COVID-19 patients: a 1-year follow-up study in Foggia district, Italy

BACKGROUND

From the initial stages of the pandemic in early 2020, COVID-19-related olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions have been widely reported and are emerging as one of the most frequent long-term sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, data regarding the long-term recovery of the sense of smell and taste are lacking. This study aimed to characterize the evolution up to one year after the diagnosis of self-reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in COVID-19 cases.

METHODS

Based on the data of the active surveillance platform of the Apulia region, Italy, we selected the residents of Foggia district who were confirmed positive for SARS-CoV-2 from March 1st to June 16th, 2020, and home-quarantined with paucisymptomatic-to-mild clinical presentation. Self-reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions were recorded at baseline through a survey of dichotomous questions. The evolution of these symptoms at approximately one year was prospectively assessed via telephone by the validated sino-nasal outcome test 22 (SNOT-22, Italian version).

RESULTS

Among the 1,175 COVID-19 cases notified in the Foggia district during the first epidemic wave, 488 had paucisymptomatic-to-mild clinical presentation. Of these, 41.2% (n = 201, 95% confidence interval [CI] 36.8-45.7%) reported at least one sensory dysfunction. A total of 178 to 201 (88.5%) patients agreed to participate in the follow-up survey. According to the SNOT-22 results, the persistence of a sensory dysfunction was observed in the 29.8% (n = 53, 95% CI 23.2-37.1%) of them. Particularly, loss of smell persisted in 25.8% (n = 46, 95% CI 19.6-32.9%), loss of taste in 21.3% (n = 38, 95% CI 15.6-28.1%), loss of both in 17.4% (n = 31, 95% CI 12.2-23.8%) of participants in the follow-up. The rates of full recovery increased over time: from 59% at 30 days to 71.9% at 90 days for the sense of smell; from 61.3% at 30 days to 74.7% at 90 days for the sense of taste.

CONCLUSIONS

The persistence of COVID-19-related olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions up to 12 months after the disease onset in a noteworthy proportion (approximately 3 out of 10) of patients with paucisymptomatic-to-mild clinical presentation deserves further investigations due to its possible pathophysiological implications and impact on the quality of life.

The Effects of Persistent Olfactory and Gustatory Dysfunctions on Quality of Life in Long-COVID-19 Patients

(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.

New Onset of Smell and Taste Loss Are Common Findings Also in Patients With Symptomatic COVID-19 After Complete Vaccination

The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical profile of patients who developed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) after full vaccination. Demographic, epidemiological and clinical data were collected through medical records and online patient‐reported outcome questionnaire from patients who developed symptomatic SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, confirmed by nasopharyngeal swab, at least 2 weeks after completion of vaccination. A total of 153 subjects were included. The most frequent symptoms were: asthenia (82.4%), chemosensory dysfunction (63.4%), headache (59.5%), runny nose (58.2%), muscle pain (54.9%), loss of appetite (54.3%), and nasal obstruction (51.6%). Particularly, 62.3% and 53.6% of subjects reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunction, respectively. Symptom severity was mild or moderate in almost all cases. Chemosensory dysfunctions have been observed to be a frequent symptom even in subjects who contracted the infection after full vaccination. For this reason, the sudden loss of smell and taste could continue to represent a useful and specific diagnostic marker to raise the suspicion of COVID‐19 even in vaccinated subjects. In the future, it will be necessary to establish what the recovery rate is in these patients.