Comparison of COVID-19 and common cold chemosensory dysfunction

Long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with and without chemosensory disorders at disease onset: a psychophysical and magnetic resonance imaging exploratory study

A preserved sense of smell and taste allows us to understand many environmental "messages" and results in meaningfully improvements to quality of life. With the COVID-19 pandemic, it became clear how important these senses are for social and nutritional status and catapulted this niche chemosensory research area towards widespread interest. In the current exploratory work, we assessed two groups of post-COVID-19 patients who reported having had (Group 1) or not (Group 2) a smell/taste impairment at the disease onset. The aim was to compare them using validated smell and taste tests as well as with brain magnetic resonance imaging volumetric analysis. Normative data were used for smell scores comparison and a pool of healthy subjects, recruited before the pandemic, served as controls for taste scores. The majority of patients in both groups showed an olfactory impairment, which was more severe in Group 1 (median UPSIT scores: 24.5 Group 1 vs 31.0 Group 2, p = 0.008), particularly among women (p = 0.014). No significant differences emerged comparing taste scores between Group 1 and Group 2, but dysgeusia was only present in Group 1 patients. However, for taste scores, a significant difference was found between Group 1 and controls (p = 0.005). No MRI anatomical abnormalities emerged in any patients while brain volumetric analysis suggested a significant difference among groups for the right caudate nucleus (p = 0.028), although this was not retained following Benjamini-Hochberg correction. This exploratory study could add new information in COVID-19 chemosensory long-lasting impairment and address future investigations on the post-COVID-19 patients' research.

Post-COVID-19 patients suffer from chemosensory, trigeminal, and salivary dysfunctions

Recent literature indicates that post-COVID-19 patients suffer from a plethora of complications, including chemosensory dysfunction. However, little attention has been given to understand the interactions between chemosensory, trigeminal, and salivary dysfunctions in these patients. The aims of this study were (1) to investigate the prevalence and combinations of chemosensory, trigeminal, and salivary dysfunctions, (2) to identify the odorants/tastants that are compromised, and (3) to explore possible associations between the four dysfunctions in post-COVID-19 patients. One hundred post-COVID-19 patients and 76 healthy controls (pre-COVID-19) were included in this cross-sectional, case-controlled study. Participants' smell, taste, trigeminal, and salivary functions were assessed. The patients had a significantly higher prevalence of parosmia (80.0%), hyposmia (42.0%), anosmia (53.0%), dysgeusia (34.0%), complete ageusia (3.0%), specific ageusia (27.0%), dysesthesia (11.0%) and dry mouth (18.0%) compared to controls (0.0% for all parameters, except 27.6% for hyposmia). Complete loss of bitter taste was the most prevalent specific ageusia (66.7%) and coffee was the most common distorted smell (56.4%). Seven different combinations of dysfunction were observed in the patients, the most common being a combination of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction (48.0%). These findings indicate that post-COVID-19 patients experience a range of chemosensory, trigeminal, and salivary disturbances, occurring in various combinations.

Subjective Smell Disturbances in Children with Sars-Cov-2 or Other Viral Infections do not Correspond with Olfactory Test Results

BACKGROUND

Olfactory dysfunction associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in children has not been verified by a validated olfactory test. We aimed to determine whether these complaints are objectifiable (test-based hyposmia), how often they occur during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to other upper respiratory tract infections (URTI), as well as in children recovered from COVID-19 compared to children with long COVID.

METHODS

Olfactory testing (U-sniff test; hyposmia<8 points) and survey-based symptom assessments were performed in 434 children (5-17 years; 04/2021-06/2022). 186 symptom-free children served as controls. Of the children with symptoms of acute respiratory tract infection, SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results were positive in 45 and negative in 107 children (URTI group). Additionally, 96 children were recruited at least 4 weeks (17.6±15.2 weeks) after COVID-19, of whom 66 had recovered and 30 had developed long COVID.

RESULTS

Compared to controls (2.7%), hyposmia frequency was increased in all other groups (11-17%, p<0.05), but no between-group differences were observed. Only 3/41 children with hyposmia reported complaints, whereas 13/16 children with complaints were normosmic, with the largest proportion being in the long-COVID group (23%, p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Questionnaires are unsuitable for assessing hyposmia frequency in children. Olfactory complaints and hyposmia are not specific for SARS-CoV-2 infection. The number of complaints in the long-COVID group could result from aversive olfactory perception, which is undetectable with the U-sniff test.

Olfactory training with four and eight odors: comparison with clinical testing and olfactory bulb volumetrics

PURPOSE

Post-infectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) is one of the most common causes of olfactory impairment but has limited treatment options. Recently, olfactory training (OT) has been considered an effective treatment method; however, several questions have arisen regarding its optimal scheme. The aim of this study was to assess whether an OT scheme with 8 odors is more effective than the classic OT scheme with 4 odors by comparing psychophysical test results and olfactory bulb (OB) volumetrics.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, 72 patients with PIOD were included. The patients followed either the classic 4-odor OT scheme (COT; n = 34 patients) or an extended 8-odor scheme (EOT; n = 38 patients) for 16 weeks. All patients underwent olfactory testing with a Sniffin'Sticks battery test at 0, 8, and 16 weeks. Of the patients, 38 underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging for OB volumetric assessment before and after treatment.

RESULTS

The comparison of the olfactory test results did not show any significant difference between the two study groups, in agreement with the OB volumetrics. The convex OB showed better test results than the non-convex OB, with significantly better improvement after treatment regardless of OT type. The EOT group presented significantly better adherence than the COT group.

CONCLUSION

The number of odors did not appear to play a significant role in the effect of the OT. However, the training scheme with more than four odors showed better adherence among the patients in a long-term treatment plan. The shape of the OB may have prognostic value in clinical assessment and warrants further investigation.

Impact of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome on olfactory and gustatory capacity

Only a few studies have investigated olfactory function in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) using psychophysical testing, and there is a scarcity of data regarding taste evaluation in the existing literature. The primary objectives of this study were to assess both smell and taste in patients with OSAS and to explore the correlation between the severity of symptoms and sensory perception. A total of 85 OSAS patients and a control group comprising 81 subjects were enrolled. Initial assessments included anamnesis, nasal endoscopy, and the completion of questionnaires (Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Visual Analogue Scale, Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders, and the importance of olfaction questionnaire). The diagnosis of OSAS was confirmed by polysomnography, while nasal airflow was evaluated using rhinomanometry. Olfaction was assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks test, and the Threshold-Discrimination-Identification (TDI) score was calculated. Taste evaluation was conducted in a subgroup of participants (42 patients, 38 controls) using taste strips. The mean TDI score was 31 ± 5.6 for OSAS patients and 35 ± 4.6 for controls, indicating a significant difference (P < 0.001). Similarly, the taste score was 7 ± 3.0 for OSAS patients and 12.6 ± 3.2 for controls (P < 0.001). No correlations were observed between TDI and Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI) (r = -0.12; P = 0.28), as well as between the taste score and AHI (r = -0.31; P = 0.22). However, a weak but significant correlation between TDI score and Epworth Sleepiness Scale was detected (r = -0.05; P = 0.002). The study revealed a significant decrease in sensory perception among patients with OSAS, though open questions persist about the pathophysiology.

Transient loss and recovery of oral chemesthesis, taste and smell with COVID-19: A small case-control series

Transient loss of smell is a common symptom of influenza and other upper respiratory infections. Loss of taste is possible but rare with these illnesses, and patient reports of 'taste loss' typically arise from a taste / flavor confusion. Thus, initial reports from COVID-19 patients of loss of taste and chemesthesis (i.e., chemical somatosensation like warming or cooling) were met with skepticism until multiple studies confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections could disrupt these senses. Many studies have been based on self-report or on single time point assessments after acute illness was ended. Here, we describe intensive longitudinal data over 28 days from adults aged 18-45 years recruited in early 2021 (i.e., prior to the Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 waves). These individuals were either COVID-19 positive or close contacts (per U.S. CDC criteria at the time of the study) in the first half of 2021. Upon enrollment, all participants were given nose clips, blinded samples of commercial jellybeans (Sour Cherry and Cinnamon), and scratch-n-sniff odor identification test cards (ScentCheckPro), which they used for daily assessments. In COVID-19 cases who enrolled on or before Day 10 of infection, Gaussian Process Regression showed two distinct measures of function - odor identification and odor intensity - declined relative to controls (exposed individuals who never developed COVID-19). Because enrollment began upon exposure, some participants became ill only after enrollment, which allowed us to capture baseline ratings, onset of loss, and recovery. Data from these four cases and four age- and sex- matched controls were plotted over 28 days to create panel plots. Variables included mean orthonasal intensity of four odors (ScentCheckPro), perceived nasal blockage, oral burn (Cinnamon jellybeans), and sourness and sweetness (Sour Cherry jellybeans). Controls exhibited stable ratings over time. By contrast, COVID-19 cases showed sharp deviations over time. Changes in odor intensity or odor identification were not explained by nasal blockage. No single pattern of taste loss or recovery was apparent, implying different taste qualities might recover at different rates. Oral burn was transiently reduced for some before recovering quickly, suggesting acute loss may be missed in datasets collected only after illness ends. Collectively, intensive daily testing shows orthonasal smell, oral chemesthesis and taste were each altered by acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. This disruption was dyssynchronous for different modalities, with variable loss and recovery rates across both modalities and individuals.

Characteristics of Chemosensory Perception in Long COVID and COVID Reinfection

Emerging data suggest an increasing prevalence of persistent symptoms in individuals affected by coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). The objective of this study was to determine the relative frequency of altered taste and smell in COVID reinfection (multiple COVID positive tests) and long COVID (one COVID positive test). We sent an electronic survey to patients in the Indiana University Health COVID registry with positive COVID test results, querying if they were experiencing symptoms consistent with long COVID including altered chemosensory perceptions. Among the 225 respondents, a greater long COVID burden and COVID reinfection was observed in women. Joint pain was reported as the most common symptom experienced by 18% of individuals in the long COVID cohort. In the COVID reinfection cohort >20% of individuals reported headache, joint pain, and cough. Taste perception worse than pre-COVID was reported by 29% and 42% of individuals in the long COVID and COVID reinfection cohorts, respectively. Smell perception worse than pre-COVID was reported by 37% and 46% of individuals in long COVID and COVID reinfection cohorts, respectively. Further, Chi-square test suggested significant association between pre-COVID severity of taste/smell perception and headache in both cohorts. Our findings highlight the prevalence of persistent chemosensory dysfunction for two years and longer in long COVID and COVID reinfection.

Olfactory Function and Olfactory Disorders

The sense of smell is important. This became especially clear to patients with infection-related olfactory loss during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We react, for example, to the body odors of other humans. The sense of smell warns us of danger, and it allows us to perceive flavors when eating and drinking. In essence, this means quality of life. Therefore, anosmia must be taken seriously. Although olfactory receptor neurons are characterized by regenerative capacity, anosmia is relatively common with about 5 % of anosmic people in the general population. Olfactory disorders are classified according to their causes (e. g., infections of the upper respiratory tract, traumatic brain injury, chronic rhinosinusitis, age) with the resulting different therapeutic options and prognoses. Thorough history taking is therefore important. A wide variety of tools are available for diagnosis, ranging from short screening tests and detailed multidimensional test procedures to electrophysiological and imaging methods. Thus, quantitative olfactory disorders are easily assessable and traceable. For qualitative olfactory disorders such as parosmia, however, no objectifying diagnostic procedures are currently available. Therapeutic options for olfactory disorders are limited. Nevertheless, there are effective options consisting of olfactory training as well as various additive drug therapies. The consultation and the competent discussion with the patients are of major importance.

Transient loss and recovery of oral chemesthesis, taste and smell with COVID-19: a small case-control series

Anosmia is common with respiratory virus infections, but loss of taste or chemesthesis is rare. Reports of true taste loss with COVID-19 were viewed skeptically until confirmed by multiple studies. Nasal menthol thresholds are elevated in some with prior COVID-19 infections, but data on oral chemesthesis are lacking. Many patients recover quickly, but precise timing and synchrony of recovery are unclear. Here, we collected broad sensory measures over 28 days, recruiting adults (18-45 years) who were COVID-19 positive or recently exposed (close contacts per U.S. CDC criteria at the time of the study) in the first half of 2021. Participants received nose clips, red commercial jellybeans (Sour Cherry and Cinnamon), and scratch-n-sniff cards (ScentCheckPro). Among COVID-19 cases who entered the study on or before Day 10 of infection, Gaussian Process Regression showed odor identification and odor intensity (two distinct measures of function) each declined relative to controls (close contacts who never developed COVID-19), but effects were larger for intensity than identification. To assess changes during early onset, we identified four COVID-19 cases who enrolled on or prior to Day 1 of their illness â€" this allowed for visualization of baseline ratings, loss, and recovery of function over time. Four controls were matched for age, gender, and race. Variables included sourness and sweetness (Sour Cherry jellybeans), oral burn (Cinnamon jellybeans), mean orthonasal intensity of four odors (ScentCheckPro), and perceived nasal blockage. Data were plotted over 28 days, creating panel plots for the eight cases and controls. Controls exhibited stable ratings over time. By contrast, COVID-19 cases showed sharp deviations over time. No single pattern of taste loss or recovery was apparent, implying different taste qualities might recover at different rates. Oral burn was transiently reduced for some before recovering quickly, suggesting acute loss may be missed in data collected after acute illness ends. Changes in odor intensity or odor identification were not explained by nasal blockage. Collectively, intensive daily testing shows orthonasal smell, oral chemesthesis and taste were each altered by acute COVID-19 infection, and this disruption was dyssynchronous for different modalities, with variable loss and recovery rates across modalities and individuals.

Nasal sprays for treating COVID-19: a scientific note

Clinical management of COVID-19 has been a daunting task. Due to the lack of specific treatment, vaccines have been regarded as the first line of defence. Innate responses and cell-mediated systemic immunity, including serum antibodies, have been the primary focus of practically all studies of the immune response to COVID-19. However, owing to the difficulties encountered by the conventional route, alternative routes for prophylaxis and therapy became the need of the hour. The first site invaded by SARS-CoV-2 is the upper respiratory tract. Nasal vaccines are already in different stages of development. Apart from prophylactic purposes, mucosal immunity can be exploited for therapeutic purposes too. The nasal route for drug delivery offers many advantages over the conventional route. Besides offering a needle-free delivery, they can be self-administered. They present less logistical burden as there is no need for refrigeration. The present article focuses on various aspects of nasal spray for eliminating COVID-19.

Effects of classical olfactory training in patients with COVID-19-related persistent loss of smell

PURPOSE

The management of post-COVID-19 persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD) is uncertain. Currently, olfactory training is the only evidence-based therapy for post-viral OD. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of classical olfactory training (COT) in the treatment of post-COVID-19 persistent OD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with persistent OD after COVID-19 were assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks test. Fifty-one patients were then divided into two groups based on personal preference: the COT group (n = 31) included subjects who performed COT over 12 weeks, and the control group (n = 20) included subjects who did not receive any treatment. After the exclusion of eight patients, the olfactory performances of 43 patients were re-evaluated and compared to the baseline values.

RESULTS

A significantly higher proportion of patients in the COT group improved their olfactory scores above the clinically important difference compared to the control group (40% versus 6%) (p = 0.014). The subjective smell improvement by COT was independent of age, gender, OD duration, presence of parosmia, or the initial olfactory score (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Twelve weeks of COT appears to increase the olfactory sensitivity in patients with persistent OD following COVID-19.

Epidemiological Characteristics, Pathogenesis and Clinical Implications of Sinusitis in the Era of COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Sinusitis is a common condition with various forms and different etiologies. In the era of COVID-19, a large number of studies covered the association between sinusitis and COVID-19, while others reported the impact of COVID-19 on the development of acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis (AIFR), together with the most commonly associated predisposing factors. Fungal sinusitis, particularly AIFR, can be life-threatening. It is important to dissect this association and improve current evidence and management. Therefore, we conducted this literature review to highlight the association between COVID-19 and sinusitis based on evidence from the available studies in the literature. Evidence shows that chronic sinusitis might have a negative impact on COVID-19 outcomes. However, current results are conflicting, and further studies are needed. On the other hand, COVID-19 can also cause olfactory dysfunction, which is usually temporary. In addition, we found several studies that indicated the association between COVID-19 and AIFR. The condition is usually associated with severe morbidities, as affected patients are usually immunocompromised, including those with uncontrolled diabetes, malignancy, immunosuppression, AIDS, the administration of chemotherapy and other immunosuppressive drugs, and COVID-19.

Pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 Infection of Nasal Respiratory and Olfactory Epithelia and Its Clinical Impact

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

While the predominant cause for morbidity and mortality with SARS-CoV-2 infection is the lower respiratory tract manifestations of the disease, the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on the sinonasal tract have also come to the forefront especially with the increased recognition of olfactory symptom. This review presents a comprehensive summary of the mechanisms of action of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, sinonasal pathophysiology of COVID-19, and the correlation with the clinical and epidemiological impact on olfactory dysfunction.

RECENT FINDINGS

ACE2 and TMPRSS2 receptors are key players in the mechanism of infection of SARS-CoV-2. They are present within both the nasal respiratory as well as olfactory epithelia. There are however differences in susceptibility between different groups of individuals, as well as between the different SARS-CoV-2 variants. The sinonasal cavity is an important route for SARS-CoV-2 infection. While the mechanism of infection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasal respiratory and olfactory epithelia is similar, there exist small but significant differences in the susceptibility of these epithelia and consequently clinical manifestations of the disease. Understanding the differences and nuances in sinonasal pathophysiology in COVID-19 would allow the clinician to predict and counsel patients suffering from COVID-19. Future research into molecular pathways and cytokine responses at different stages of infection and different variants of SARS-CoV-2 would evaluate the individual clinical phenotype, prognosis, and possibly response to vaccines and therapeutics.

Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chemosensory scientists have been skeptical that reports of COVID-19 taste loss are genuine, in part because before COVID-19 taste loss was rare and often confused with smell loss. Therefore, to establish the predicted prevalence rate of taste loss in COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 376 papers published in 2020-2021, with 235 meeting all inclusion criteria. Drawing on previous studies and guided by early meta-analyses, we explored how methodological differences (direct vs. self-report measures) may affect these estimates. We hypothesized that direct measures of taste are at least as sensitive as those obtained by self-report and that the preponderance of evidence confirms taste loss is a symptom of COVID-19. The meta-analysis showed that, among 138,015 COVID-19-positive patients, 36.62% reported taste dysfunction (95% confidence interval: 33.02%-40.39%), and the prevalence estimates were slightly but not significantly higher from studies using direct (n = 15) versus self-report (n = 220) methodologies (Q = 1.73, df = 1, P = 0.1889). Generally, males reported lower rates of taste loss than did females, and taste loss was highest among middle-aged adults. Thus, taste loss is likely a bona fide symptom of COVID-19, meriting further research into the most appropriate direct methods to measure it and its underlying mechanisms.

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.

Genetic variation in sweet taste receptors and a mechanistic perspective on sweet and fat taste sensation in the context of obesity

Taste sensation enables humans to make nutritionally important decisions such as food preference and consumption. It functions as deterministic factors for unpropitious eating behavior, leading to overweight and obesity. The hedonistic feeling on consumption of fat and sugar-rich meals, in particular, has a negative influence on health. In addition, impairment in the taste receptors alters the downstream signaling of taste transduction pathway. Hence, genetic polymorphism in typical taste receptors is a predictor of taste sensitivity variance across individuals. The present review summarizes the effect of a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in sweet taste receptors (T1R2/T1R3) on taste perception among individuals of various body mass index (BMI). Furthermore, in the context of obesity, we discussed the possibility of crosstalk between fat and sweet receptors as well as taste dysfunction in diseased individuals. In overall, a greater understanding of the physiological relationship between taste receptors, altered taste sensitivity, and genetic polymorphisms should lead to more effective obesity prevention approaches.

Eating Habits and Body Weight Changes Induced by Variation in Smell and Taste in Patients with Previous SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction are recognized as common symptoms in patients with COVID-19, with a prevalence ranging, respectively, between 41-61% and 38.2-49%. This review focused on relating the variations in dietary habits with the reduction/loss of smell and/or taste in patients who contracted the COVID-19 infection. Primarily, we reviewed the main pathological mechanisms involved in COVID 19-induced anosmia/dysosmia and ageusia/dysgeusia. Then, we explored and summarized the behavioural changes in food intake and body weight during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to sensory impairment and the underlying mechanisms. Most studies on this topic argue that the altered chemosensory perception (taste and smell) mainly induces reduced appetite, leading to a faster fullness sensation during the consumption of a meal and, therefore, to a decrease in body weight. On the other hand, a reduced perception of the food's sensory properties may trigger compensatory responses that lead some individuals to increase food intake with a different effect on body weight. Regarding body weight, most studies evaluated malnutrition in patients hospitalized for COVID-19; more studies are warranted to investigate nutritional status specifically in non-hospitalized patients with olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions caused by COVID-19 infection.

Efficacy and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of the sequela of olfactory disorders after infection with COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

BACKGROUND

From the end of 2019 to now, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has put enormous strain on the world's health systems. As a characteristic sign of COVID-19 patient, olfactory dysfunction (OD) poses considerable problems for patients. In China, acupuncture has been widely used to treat OD caused by COVID-19, but there is still a lack of evidence-based medical evaluation. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for the treatment of COVID-19 OD.

METHODS

According to the retrieval strategies, randomized controlled trials on the acupuncture for COVID-19 OD were obtained from Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, the Chinese Scientific Journal Database and the Wanfang Database, regardless of publication date, or language. Studies were screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the Cochrane risk bias assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan 5.3) and STATA 14.2 software. Ultimately, the evidentiary grade for the results will be evaluated.

RESULTS

The results of this meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.

CONCLUSION

This study will provide up-to-date summary proof for evaluating the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for COVID-19 OD.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the pandemic has resulted in a large number of individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance. This is an update of the 2021 review with four studies added.

OBJECTIVES

1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with acute 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, which had been present for less than 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 presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life 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 five studies with 691 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: intranasal corticosteroid sprays, intranasal corticosteroid drops, intranasal hypertonic saline and zinc sulphate.  Intranasal corticosteroid spray compared to no intervention/placebo We included three studies with 288 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for less than four weeks following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on both self-rated recovery of olfactory function and recovery of olfactory function using psychophysical tests at up to four weeks follow-up (self-rated: risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; psychophysical testing: RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.63; 1 study; 77 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Change in sense of smell The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on self-rated change in the sense of smell (at less than 4 weeks: mean difference (MD) 0.5 points lower, 95% CI 1.38 lower to 0.38 higher; 1 study; 77 participants; at > 4 weeks to 3 months: MD 2.4 points higher, 95% CI 1.32 higher to 3.48 higher; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence, rated on a scale of 1 to 10, higher scores mean better olfactory function). Intranasal corticosteroids may make little or no difference to the change in sense of smell when assessed with psychophysical testing (MD 0.2 points, 95% CI 2.06 points lower to 2.06 points higher; 1 study; 77 participants; low-certainty evidence, 0- to 24-point scale, higher scores mean better olfactory function).  Serious adverse effects The authors of one study reported no adverse effects, but their intention to collect these data was not pre-specified so we are uncertain if these were systematically sought and identified. The remaining two studies did not report on adverse effects.  Intranasal corticosteroid drops compared to no intervention/placebo We included one study with 248 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for ≤ 15 days following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function Intranasal corticosteroid drops may make little or no difference to self-rated recovery at > 4 weeks to 3 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.11; 1 study; 248 participants; low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were assessed by this study.  Data on the use of hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and the use of zinc sulphate to prevent persistent olfactory dysfunction are included in the full text of the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for preventing 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.

Persisting Smell and Taste Disorders in Patients Who Recovered from SARS-CoV-2 Virus Infection-Data from the Polish PoLoCOV-CVD Study

In the majority of cases, patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus experience a complete resolution of symptoms within six weeks of acquiring the infection, but an increasing number of patients report persistent symptoms. This study aimed to analyse the prevalence of self-reported smell and/or taste disorders (STDs) in a group of convalescent patients after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and to identify risk factors for the disease. The study included 2218 COVID-19 convalescents after both inpatient and outpatient treatment. The sample group was analysed with regard to chronic diseases, place of isolation and clinical symptoms occurring during COVID-19 along with their duration. The assessment also included the most common symptoms of COVID-19 and the severity of the disease course. A total of 98 patients reported persistent smell and taste disorders up to three months after the end of isolation (67.4% of men and 32.6% of women). The mean age of the participants was 53.8 ± 13.5 years (49.19 ± 14.68 in patients with an STD vs. 54.01 ± 13.44 in patients without an STD). The patients treated for COVID-19 at home (p < 0.001) constituted almost the entire group of patients with persistent smell and taste disorders (97%). Among the patients with persistent smell and taste disorders, 57.1% suffered from at least one chronic condition (vs. 71.4% of patients without an STD). In patients with an STD, the number of symptoms per patient was higher than in the other group at 8.87 ± 3.65 (p = 0.018), while the most common clinical symptoms during the acute phase of COVID-19 were smell and taste disorders (84%) (p < 0.001), significant weakness (70%), headache (60%), cough (55%), arthralgia (51%) (p = 0.034) and back muscle pain (51%). Based on the results obtained, the following conclusions were drawn: the risk of developing persistent smell and taste disorders after COVID-19 is greater in younger people with less comorbidities and a higher number of symptoms during the acute phase of COVID-19. The risk is associated with clinical symptoms occurring during the acute phase of COVID-19, i.e., smell and taste disorders and arthralgia. In addition, this risk is higher in patients receiving outpatient treatment for COVID-19.

Pediatric olfactory home testing using regular household items: A cross-over validation study

OBJECTIVE

To develop an olfactory test that can be conducted by an untrained person using common household items and to introduce a German version of the Chemosensory Pleasure Scale for Children (CPS-C(de)).

METHODOLOGY

This olfactory home test was developed in phases including evaluation of odors for suitability in a home setting. Parents of 50 children (ages 6-17) were then equipped with instruction manuals and participants were tested twice in a cross-over design. A validated pediatric olfactory test (the Universal Sniff test (U-Sniff)) served as the comparative gold standard. Additionally, a Chinese-English-German "back-and-forth" translation was conducted to establish the CPS-C(de) and was tested for empirical validity.

RESULTS

Fourteen items were tested for feasibility, and all were identified on a sufficient rate (≥66%, mean ± SD of 93.3% ± 9.5%). Bland Altman Plot analysis between home testing and the U-Sniff test was nearly identical (bias = 0.04). CPS-C(de) showed similar results to the original Chinese version and a moderate correlation was found between CPS-C(de) scores and Body Mass Index of children (r₃₀ = -0.527, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Remote olfactory testing in children using household items is feasible. The CPS-C(de) may be of value for future olfactory studies.

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.

Changes in smell and taste perception related to COVID-19 infection: a case-control study

The main aim of the present study was to psychophysically evaluate smell and taste functions in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and to compare those results with a group of healthy subjects. Another aim of the study was to assess the relationship of changes in patients’ smell and taste functions with a number of clinical parameters, symptoms, and other physiological signs as well as with severity of disease. Olfactory and gustatory functions were tested in 61 hospitalized patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection and in a control group of 54 healthy individuals. Overall, we found a significant impairment of olfactory and gustatory functions in COVID-19 patients compared with the control group. Indeed, about 45% of patients self-reported complaints about or loss of either olfactory or gustatory functions. These results were confirmed by psychophysical testing, which showed a significantly reduced performance in terms of intensity perception and identification ability for both taste and smell functions in COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, gustatory and olfactory impairments tended to be more evident in male patients suffering from more severe respiratory failure (i.e., pneumonia with need of respiratory support need during hospitalization).

Patient experience of symptoms and impacts of COVID-19: a qualitative investigation with symptomatic outpatients

OBJECTIVES

There is little in-depth qualitative evidence of how symptoms manifest themselves in outpatients with COVID-19 and how these in turn impact outpatients' daily lives. The objective of the study was therefore to explore the experience of outpatients with COVID-19 qualitatively, concerning the symptomatic experience and its subsequent impact on daily life.

SETTING

Qualitative research study comprising virtual in-depth, open-ended interviews with outpatients and clinicians.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty US adult patients with COVID-19 were interviewed within 21 days of diagnosis. Patients were 60% female and 87% white, who had to self-report one of the following: fever, cough, shortness of breath/difficulty breathing, change/loss of taste/smell, vomiting/diarrhoea or body/muscle aches. Five independent clinicians were also interviewed about their experience treating outpatients.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Transcripts were analysed thematically to organise symptoms and impacts of daily life into higher-order overarching categories, and subsequently propose a conceptual model. The adequacy of the sample size was assessed by conceptual saturation analysis.

RESULTS

Patient-reported concepts were organised into six symptom themes (upper respiratory, lower respiratory, systemic, gastrointestinal, smell and taste, and other) and seven impact themes (activities of daily living, broad daily activities, leisure/social activities, and physical, emotional, professional and quarantine-specific impacts). Symptom type, severity, duration and time of onset varied by patient. Clinicians endorsed all patient-reported symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The manifestation of symptoms in outpatients is heterogeneous and affects all aspects of daily life. Outpatients offered new detailed insights into their symptomatic experiences, including heterogeneous experiences of smell and taste, and the impacts that symptoms had on their daily lives. Findings of this research may be used to supplement existing knowledge of the outpatient experience of mild-to-moderate COVID-19, to further inform treatment guidelines and to provide an evidence base for evaluating potential treatment benefits.

Persisting olfactory dysfunction in post-COVID-19 is associated with gustatory impairment: Results from chemosensitive testing eight months after the acute infection

Olfactory and gustatory disorders are prominent symptoms of acute COVID-19. Although both senses recover in many patients within weeks to months, persistency has been described in up to 60%. However up to now most reports on the course of chemosensitive disorders after COVID-19 are not based on psychophysical testing but only on subjective patients' ratings. In this study we assessed both olfaction and gustation using psychophysical tests eight months after COVID-19. Validated psychophysical testing revealed hyposmia in 18% and hypogeusia in even 32% of 303 included patients. This shows that olfactory and especially gustatory disorders have to be seen as important chronic symptoms post-COVID-19. The high prevalence of gustatory dysfunction indicates that gustatory function does not recover or might even deteriorate in the months following the acute infection.

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.

SARS-CoV-2 Leads to Significantly More Severe Olfactory Loss than Other Seasonal Cold Viruses

The aim of this study was to investigate whether COVID-associated olfactory impairment differs from olfactory disorders due to other upper respiratory tract infections. We investigated the frequency of a SARS-CoV-2 infection among subjects presenting with a subjective olfactory impairment to a corona outpatient clinic between October 2020 and March 2021. Olfactory and gustatory loss were tested psychophysically, and the type of infection, SARS-CoV-2 versus 14 other common cold viruses, was assessed with nasopharyngeal swabs. Differences between the smell impairment caused by the pathogens were compared. Out of the 2120 patients, 314 reported sudden smell and/or taste loss (14%). In 68.9% of them, olfactory and in 25.6%, gustatory dysfunction could be confirmed by psychophysical testing. Of those with a psychophysically determined loss of smell, 61% were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. SARS-CoV-2 led to a significantly more severe loss of smell and more qualitative olfactory disorders than other pathogens. Apart from rhinorrhea, shortness of breath and sore throat accompanying cold symptoms do not differ significantly between the viruses indicating the particular importance of smell loss in the differential diagnosis of seasonal colds. Multiplex-PCR in non-COVID patients revealed that only 27% of them had rhinoviruses, whereas the remainder were no further identified pathogens. Olfactory screening significantly increases diagnostic accuracy in COVID-19 patients compared to subjective assessment of olfactory loss.

“Anosmia” the mysterious collateral damage of COVID-19

COVID-19 pandemic spreads worldwide, with more than 100 million positive cases and more than 2 million deaths. From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, several otolaryngologists described many cases of a sudden loss of smell (anosmia) associated with the disease with or without additional symptoms. Anosmia is often the first and sometimes the only sign in the asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19. Still, this disorder is underestimated, and it is not life-threatening. However, it significantly decreases the quality of life. This olfactory dysfunction continues in several cases even after the nasopharyngeal swab was negative. The occurrence of anosmia can be used as a screening tool for COVID-19 patients and can be used to identify these patients to accomplish the isolation and tracking procedures. In this review, we highlighted the possible mechanisms of anosmia in COVID-19 patients, major pathologies and features of anosmia, implications of anosmia in early diagnosis of COVID-19, evaluation of the smell function during COVID-19, and management and treatment options of COVID-19 anosmia.

Treatment strategies for postviral olfactory dysfunction: A systematic review

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been associated with a dramatic increase in postviral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD) among patients who are infected. A contemporary evidence-based review of current treatment options for PVOD is both timely and relevant to improve patient care. Objective: This review seeks to impact patient care by qualitatively reviewing available evidence in support of medical and procedural treatment options for PVOD. Systematic evaluation of data quality and of the level of evidence was completed to generate current treatment recommendations. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify primary studies that evaluated treatment outcomes for PVOD. A number of medical literature data bases were queried from January 1998 to May 2020, with completion of subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles to identify all relevant studies. Validated tools for the assessment of bias among both interventional and observational studies were used to complete quality assessment. The summary level of evidence and associated outcomes were used to generate treatment recommendations. Results: Twenty-two publications were identified for qualitative review. Outcomes of alpha-lipoic acid, intranasal and systemic corticosteroids, minocycline, zinc sulfate, vitamin A, sodium citrate, caroverine, intranasal insulin, theophylline, and Gingko biloba are reported. In addition, outcomes of traditional Chinese acupuncture and olfactory training are reviewed. Conclusion: Several medical and procedural treatments may expedite the return of olfactory function after PVOD. Current evidence supports olfactory training as a first-line intervention. Additional study is required to define specific treatment recommendations and expected outcomes for PVOD in the setting of COVID-19.

Long-Term Subjective and Objective Assessment of Smell and Taste in COVID-19

Among the first clinical symptoms of the SARS-CoV-2 infection is olfactory−gustatory deficit; this continues for weeks and, in some cases, can be persistent. We prospectively evaluated 162 patients affected by COVID-19 using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for nasal and olfactory−gustatory symptoms. Patients were checked after 7, 14, 21, 28, 90, and 180 days. A total of 118 patients (72.8%) reported an olfactory VAS < 7 at baseline (group B), and 44 (27.2%) reported anosmia (VAS ≥ 7) (group A) and underwent the Brief Smell Identification Test (B-SIT) and Burghart Taste Strips (BTS) to quantify the deficit objectively and repeated the tests to confirm the sense recovery. Group A patients showed B-SIT anosmia and hyposmia in 44.2% and 55.8% of cases, respectively. A total of 88.6% of group A patients reported ageusia with VAS ≥ 7, and BTS confirmed 81.8% of ageusia and 18.2% of hypogeusia. VAS smell recovery was recorded starting from 14 days, with normalization at 28 days. The 28-day B-SIT score showed normosmia in 90.6% of group A patients. The mean time for full recovery (VAS = 0) was shorter in group B (22.9 days) than in group A (31.9 days). Chemosensory deficit is frequently the first symptom in patients with COVID-19, and, in most cases, recovery occurs after four weeks.

Gustatory Function in Acute COVID ‐19 ‐ Results from Home‐Based Psychophysical Testing

Objective

Gustatory function during COVID‐19 is self‐reported by around 50% of patients. However, only a few studies assessed gustation using psychophysical testing during acute infection. The objective of this study is to test gustatory function on threshold tests in the very first days of COVID‐19.

Methods

Psychophysical testing consisted of validated and blinded tests for olfaction (NHANES Pocket Smell Test) and gustation (Taste Strips Test). These test kits were sent to home‐quarantined patients and self‐administered using a detailed instruction sheet.

Results

A total of 51 patients were included in this study. Testing was performed 6.5 ± 2.7 days after sampling of respiratory swabs. At this time 37% of patients stated to currently experience a gustatory impairment. The mean Taste Strips score was 10.0 ± 3.4 with 28% scoring in the range of hypogeusia. Interestingly, no significant difference in the results of gustatory testing could be observed between the group with subjectively preserved gustation and the group with self‐rated taste impairment.

Conclusion

During the very first days of COVID‐19, psychophysical gustatory testing revealed hypogeusia in 28%. This is far lower than patients' self‐reports. Different from previous studies, we did not find clear evidence for an impairment of only certain taste qualities.

Level of Evidence

3 Laryngoscope, 132:1082–1087, 2022

COVID-19 related olfactory dysfunction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the literature on COVID-19 related anosmia, focusing on the epidemiology, pathophysiology recovery rates, current available treatment options, and research regarding novel treatments.

RECENT FINDINGS

Loss of sense of smell is one of the most prevalent symptoms reported by patients after COVID-19 infection. Even though there is a high self-reported recovery rate, recent studies have demonstrated that up to 7% of the patients remain anosmic more than 12 months after onset, leaving millions worldwide with severe olfactory dysfunction. Olfactory training remains the first line recommended treatment. Given the paucity of effective medical treatments options researchers are exploring novel therapeutic options.

SUMMARY

Olfactory dysfunction remains a significant and persistent legacy of the COVID-19 pandemic, but heightened awareness may stimulate research that leads to the development of much-needed treatment options.

The Oral Complications of COVID-19

Background: COVID-19 is a novel coronavirus infectious disease associated with the severe acute respiratory syndrome. More and more patients are being cured due to the development of clinical guidelines for COVID-19 pneumonia diagnosis, treatment, and vaccines. However, the long-term impact of COVID-19 on patients after recovery is unclear. Currently available reports have shown that patients recovered from COVID-19 continue to experience health problems in respiratory and other organ systems. Oral problem is one of the important complications which has serious impacts on the rehabilitation and future quality of life, such as ageusia and macroglossia, but the oral complication is often being neglected.

Aim of Review: From the perspective of stomatology, we summarized and elaborated in detail the types, pathogenesis of oral complications from COVID-19 patients after rehabilitation, and the reported prevention or treatment recommendations which may improve the COVID-19 patients associated oral diseases.

Key Scientific Concepts of Review: 1) To understand the common oral complications and the mechanisms of the development of oral complications after the COVID-19 recovery; 2) To summary the practical strategies to prevent the oral complications and construct the rehabilitation plans for patients with oral complications.

Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chemosensory scientists have been skeptical that reports of COVID-19 taste loss are genuine, in part because before COVID-19 taste loss was rare and often confused with smell loss. Therefore, to establish the predicted prevalence rate of taste loss in COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 376 papers published in 2020-2021, with 241 meeting all inclusion criteria. Drawing on previous studies and guided by early meta-analyses, we explored how methodological differences (direct vs. self-report measures) may affect these estimates. We hypothesized that direct measures of taste are at least as sensitive as those obtained by self-report and that the preponderance of evidence confirms taste loss is a symptom of COVID-19. The meta-analysis showed that, among 138,897 COVID-19-positive patients, 39.2% reported taste dysfunction (95% confidence interval: 35.34%-43.12%), and the prevalence estimates were slightly but not significantly higher from studies using direct (n = 18) versus self-report (n = 223) methodologies (Q = 0.57, df = 1, P = 0.45). Generally, males reported lower rates of taste loss than did females, and taste loss was highest among middle-aged adults. Thus, taste loss is likely a bona fide symptom of COVID-19, meriting further research into the most appropriate direct methods to measure it and its underlying mechanisms.

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

High Frequencies of Functional Virus-Specific CD4+ T Cells in SARS-CoV-2 Subjects With Olfactory and Taste Disorders

Olfactory and taste disorders (OTD) are commonly found as presenting symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with clinically mild COVID-19. Virus-specific T cells are thought to play an important role in the clearance of SARS-CoV-2; therefore the study of T cell specific immune responses in patients with mild symptoms may help to understand their possible role in protection from severe disease. We evaluated SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses to four different peptide megapools covering all SARS-CoV-2 proteins during the acute phase of the disease in 33 individuals with mild or no other symptom beside OTD and in 22 age-matched patients with severe infection. A control group of 15 outpatients with OTD and consistently negative nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA swabs and virus-specific IgG serology was included in the study. Increased frequencies of virus-specific CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells were found in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients with OTD compared with those with severe COVID-19 and with SARS-CoV-2 negative OTD individuals. Moreover, enhanced CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T-cell activation induced by SARS-CoV-2 peptides was associated with higher interferon (IFN)γ production. Increased frequencies of Spike (S1/S2)-specific CD4⁺ T cells showing enhanced IFNγ secretion and granzyme B content were associated with serum spike-specific IgG in the OTD group. In conclusion, patients with SARS-CoV-2 induced OTD develop highly functional virus-specific CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells during the symptomatic phase of the disease, suggesting that robust and coordinated T-cell responses provide protection against extension of COVID-19 to the lower respiratory tract.

Rhinology in review: from COVID-19 to biologicals

We look back at the end of what soon will be seen as an historic year, from COVID-19 to real-world introduction of biologicals influencing the life of our patients. This review describes the important findings in Rhinology over the past year. A large body of evidence now demonstrates loss of sense of smell to be one of the most common symptoms of COVID-19 infection; a meta-analysis of 3563 patients found the mean prevalence of self-reported loss to be 47%. A number of studies have now shown long-term reduced loss of smell and parosmia. Given the high numbers of people affected by COVID-19, even with the best reported recovery rates, a significant number worldwide will be left with severe olfactory dysfunction. The most prevalent causes for olfactory dysfunction, besides COVID-19 and upper respiratory tract infections in general, are trauma and CRSwNP. For these CRSwNP patients a bright future seems to be starting with the development of treatment with biologics. This year the Nobel prize in Medicine 2021 was awarded jointly to David Julius and Ardem Patapoutian for their discoveries of receptors for temperature and touch which has greatly enhanced our understanding of nasal hyperreactivity and understanding of intranasal trigeminal function. Finally, a new definition of chronic rhinitis has been proposed in the last year and we have seen many papers emphasizing the importance of endotyping patients in chronic rhinitis and rhinosinusitis in order to optimise treatment effect.

Exploring the Clinical Utility of Gustatory Dysfunction (GD) as a Triage Symptom Prior to Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) in the Diagnosis of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of COVID-19 is made using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) but its sensitivity varies from 20 to 100%. The presence of gustatory dysfunction (GD) in a patient with upper respiratory tract symptoms might increase the clinical suspicion of COVID-19.

AIMS

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of using GD as a triage symptom prior to RT-PCR.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched up to 20 June 2021. Studies published in English were included if they compared the frequency of GD in COVID-19 adult patients (proven by RT-PCR) to COVID-19 negative controls in case control or cross-sectional studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.

RESULTS

21,272 COVID-19 patients and 52,298 COVID-19 negative patients were included across 44 studies from 21 countries. All studies were of moderate to high risk of bias. Patients with GD were more likely to test positive for COVID-19: DOR 6.39 (4.86-8.40), LR+ 3.84 (3.04-4.84), LR- 0.67 (0.64-0.70), pooled sensitivity 0.37 (0.29-0.47) and pooled specificity 0.92 (0.89-0.94). While history/questionnaire-based assessments were predictive of RT-PCR positivity (DOR 6.62 (4.95-8.85)), gustatory testing was not (DOR 3.53 (0.98-12.7)). There was significant heterogeneity among the 44 studies (I2 = 92%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

GD is useful as a symptom to determine if a patient should undergo further testing, especially in resource-poor regions where COVID-19 testing is scarce. Patients with GD may be advised to quarantine while repeated testing is performed if the initial RT-PCR is negative.

FUNDING

None.

Are Multiple Chemosensory Systems Accountable for COVID-19 Outcome?

Chemosensory systems (olfaction, taste, trigeminus nerve, solitary chemoreceptor cells, neuroendocrine pulmonary cells, and carotid body, etc.) detect molecules outside or inside our body and may share common molecular markers. In addition to the impairment of taste and olfaction, the detection of the internal chemical environment may also be incapacitated by COVID-19. If this is the case, different consequences can be expected. (1) In some patients, hypoxia does not trigger distressing dyspnea ("silent" hypoxia): Long-term follow-up may determine whether silent hypoxia is related to malfunctioning of carotid body chemoreceptors. Moreover, taste/olfaction and oxygen chemoreceptors may be hit simultaneously: Testing olfaction, taste, and oxygen chemoreceptor functions in the early stages of COVID-19 allows one to unravel their connections and trace the recovery path. (2) Solitary chemosensory cells are also involved in the regulation of the innate mucosal immune response: If these cells are affected in some COVID-19 patients, the mucosal innate immune response would be dysregulated, opening one up to massive infection, thus explaining why COVID-19 has lethal consequences in some patients. Similar to taste and olfaction, oxygen chemosensory function can be easily tested with a non-invasive procedure in humans, while functional tests for solitary chemosensory or pulmonary neuroendocrine cells are not available, and autoptic investigation is required to ascertain their involvement.

Phantosmia, Parosmia, and Dysgeusia Are Prolonged and Late-Onset Symptoms of COVID-19

Deficiencies in smell and taste are common symptoms of COVID-19. Quantitative losses are well surveyed. This study focuses on qualitative changes such as phantosmia (hallucination of smell), parosmia (alteration of smell), and dysgeusia (alteration of taste) and possible connections with the adaptive immune system. Subjective experience of deficiency in taste and smell was assessed by two different questionnaires after a median of 100 and 244 days after first positive RT-PCR test. SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody levels were measured with the iFlash-SARS-CoV-2 assay. After 100 days a psychophysical screening test for olfactory and gustatory dysfunction was administered. 30 of 44 (68.2%) participants reported a chemosensory dysfunction (14 quantitative, 6 qualitative, 10 quantitative, and qualitative) during COVID-19, eleven (25.0%) participants (1 quantitative, 7 qualitative, 3 quantitative, and quantity) after 100 days, and 14 (31.8%) participants (1 quantitative, 10 qualitative, 3 quantitative and qualitative) after 244 days. Four (9.1%) participants, who were symptom-free after 100 days reported now recently arisen qualitative changes. Serological and T-cell analysis showed no correlation with impairment of taste and smell. In conclusion, qualitative changes can persist for several months and occur as late-onset symptoms months after full recovery from COVID-19-induced quantitative losses in taste and smell.

Clinical, Prognostic, and Predictive Value of Olfactory Dysfunction for COVID-19: A Prospective Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of olfactory dysfunction on the course and severity of COVID-19 and its prognostic and predictive significance for COVID-19.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective case-control study.

SETTING

Ondokuz Mayıs University School of Medicine.

METHODS

Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive patients, patients with COVID-19-related symptoms who had a negative PCR result, and healthy controls were included in the study. Clinicodemographic characteristics, inflammatory markers, and computed tomography stages were recorded. Disease progression and intensive care unit admission were registered. The visual analog scale (0, worst; 10, best) was used to evaluate subjective olfactory, taste, and nasal breathing ability, and the Sniffin' Sticks identification (SS-ID) test was used for psychophysical olfactory assessment.

RESULTS

Mean SS-ID scores were significantly lower in the positive group (8.77) than in the negative (10.43) and healthy control (12.17) groups. VAS-smell scores were significantly lower and anosmia was more prevalent in PCR-positive patients (P < .01). SS-ID and VAS-smell scores were significantly correlated (r = 0.681, P < .001). The inflammatory parameters, pulmonary infiltration stage, disease progression, and ICU admission were not associated with SS-ID scores. A cutoff SS-ID score <9 resulted in 55.56% sensitivity in predicting COVID-19 positivity, and a cutoff VAS-smell score <8 yielded 72.22% sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

Olfactory dysfunction was detected objectively and subjectively in the PCR-positive group, and no difference was found in terms of taste function and nasal breathing. The severity and prognosis of COVID-19 are not exclusively dependent on olfactory dysfunction. The degree of olfactory dysfunction can be useful in predicting PCR positivity.

The taste of the pandemic-contemporary review on the current state of research on gustation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Subjectively perceived impairment of taste is a common and distinct symptom of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Large meta-analyses identified this symptom in approximately 50% of cases. However, this high prevalence is not supported by blinded and validated psychophysical gustatory testing, which showed a much lower prevalence in up to 26% of patients. This discrepancy may be due to misinterpretation of impaired retronasal olfaction as gustatory dysfunction. In addition, we hypothesized that COVID-19-associated hyposmia is involved in the decrease of gustatory function, as found for hyposmia of different origin. This indirect mechanism would be based on the central-nervous mutual amplification between the chemical senses, which fails in COVID-19-associated olfactory loss. However, further research is necessary on how severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) may directly impair the gustatory pathway as well as its subjective perception.

Taste loss as a distinct symptom of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chemosensory scientists have been skeptical that reports of COVID-19 taste loss are genuine, in part because before COVID-19, taste loss was rare and often confused with smell loss. Therefore, to establish the predicted prevalence rate of taste loss in COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 376 papers published in 2020-2021, with 241 meeting all inclusion criteria. Additionally, we explored how methodological differences (direct vs. self-report measures) may affect these estimates. We hypothesized that direct prevalence measures of taste loss would be the most valid because they avoid the taste/smell confusion of self-report. The meta-analysis showed that, among 138,897 COVID-19-positive patients, 39.2% reported taste dysfunction (95% CI: 35.34-43.12%), and the prevalence estimates were slightly but not significantly higher from studies using direct (n = 18) versus self-report (n = 223) methodologies (Q = 0.57, df = 1, p = 0.45). Generally, males reported lower rates of taste loss than did females and taste loss was highest in middle-aged groups. Thus, taste loss is a bona fide symptom COVID-19, meriting further research into the most appropriate direct methods to measure it and its underlying mechanisms.

Persistent chemosensory dysfunction in a young patient with mild COVID-19 with partial recovery 15 months after the onset

Objective

It is reported that recovery from COVID-19 chemosensory deficit generally occurs in a few weeks, although olfactory dysfunction may persist longer. Here, we provide a detailed follow-up clinical investigation in a very young female patient (17-year-old) with a long-lasting anosmia after a mild infection, with partial recovery 15 months after the onset.

Methods

Neuroimaging and neurophysiologic assessments as well as olfactory mucosa swabbing for microbiological and immunocytochemical analyses were performed. Olfactory and gustatory evaluations were conducted through validated tests.

Results

Chemosensory evaluations were consistent with anosmia associated with parosmia phenomena and gustatory impairment, the latter less persistent. Brain MRI (3.0 T) showed no microvascular injury in olfactory bulbs and brain albeit we cannot rule out slight structural abnormalities during the acute phase, and a high-density EEG was negative. Immunocytochemistry of olfactory mucosa swabs showed high expression of ACE2 in sustentacular cells and lower dot-like cytoplasmic positivity in neuronal-shaped cells.

Discussion

The occurrence of long-term persistent olfactory deficit in spite of the absence of structural brain and olfactory bulb involvement supports the view of a possible persistent dysfunction of both sustentacular cells and olfactory neurons. The gustatory dysfunction even if less persisting for the described features could be related to a primary gustatory system involvement. Future longitudinal studies are needed to investigate the persistence of chemosensory impairment, which could have a relevant impact on the daily life.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10072-021-05635-y.

Simple Disposable Odor Identification Tests for Predicting SARS-CoV-2 Positivity

Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common manifestation of COVID-19 and may be useful for screening. Survey-based olfactory evaluation tends to underestimate the prevalence of OD, while psychophysical olfactory testing during a pandemic has the disadvantage of being time consuming, expensive, and requiring standardized laboratory settings. We aimed to develop a quick, simple, affordable, and reliable test to objectively assess the prevalence and diagnostic accuracy of OD in COVID-19. The olfactory function of 64 COVID-19 inpatients and 34 controls was evaluated using a questionnaire and a simple disposable odor identification test (SDOIT) developed for this study. Four SDOIT models were assessed: 10-SDOIT, 9-SDOIT, 8-SDOIT, and 4-SDOIT, with 10, 9, 8 and 4 samples, respectively. We found a high frequency of self-reported OD in COVID-19 patients, with 32.8% and 42.2% reporting current and recent OD, respectively. Different SDOIT models revealed smell impairment in 54.7-64.1% of COVID-19 patients. The combination of either 10-SDOIT results and self-reported OD, or 8-SDOIT results and self-reported OD, were the best predictors of COVID-19, both with an AUC value of 0.87 (0.85 and 0.86 for the age-matched subjects). OD is a common symptom of COVID-19. A combination of self-reported smell deterioration and OD psychophysically evaluated using SDOIT appears to be a good predictor of COVID-19.