Search

Objective: To identify predictors associated with loss and recovery of smell and taste after COVID‐19 infection. Methods: The Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) 2021 National Health Interview Series (NHIS) database was used to analyze factors associated with loss and recovery of smell and taste in respondents who had a previous COVID‐19 infection. Significant variables from univariate analysis were included in a stepwise backward regression model to identify independent predictors. Results: Of the 3844 individuals who answered yes to having contracted COVID‐19, 51.1% and 48.9% reported losing smell and taste, respectively. 95.7% recovered smell and 97% recovered taste. Predictors associated with higher odds of reporting a loss of smell included younger age (odds ratio [OR] 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98–0.99), female sex (OR 1.38; CI 1.17–1.63), use of e‐cigarettes (OR 1.59; CI 1.25–2.02), and Mexican ethnicity (OR 1.61; CI 1.22–2.11). Predictors of taste loss were younger age (OR 0.98; CI 0.98–0.99), female sex (OR 1.31; CI 1.08–1.58), and higher BMI (OR 1.02; CI 1.00–1.04). Female sex was associated with decreased odds of reporting a recovery of smell (OR 0.74; CI 0.59–0.92) and taste (OR 0.54; CI 0.42–0.69). Black/African American race (OR 1.44; CI 1.03–2.03) and non‐Mexican Hispanic ethnicities (OR 1.55; CI 1.02–2.34) were associated with an increased likelihood of reporting the recovery of smell. Conclusion: Various factors may be associated with the loss and recovery of smell and taste after COVID‐19 infections. Clinicians may use this information to better counsel patients with these symptoms. Level of evidence: 4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The assessment of baseline olfactory function before endoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS) has been relatively limited compared with analysis before functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). Our study addresses this knowledge gap, assessing preoperative olfactory function in ESBS and FESS and elucidating any differences. Study Design We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing anterior ESBS or FESS at a single institution between 2021 and 2022. We included 171 patients and compared their reported and measured preoperative olfactory function using the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test questionnaire and the 40-item University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test. Results Of the 171 patients included in this study, 30% of patients underwent ESBS and 70% underwent FESS. Of all patients, only 57% correctly reported their objective preoperative olfactory function. Of the 36 ESBS patients with measured preoperative hyposmia, only 31% correctly reported hyposmia, while 69% incorrectly reported normosmia. This distribution significantly differs (p < 0.0001) from the FESS subset (89 patients), with 64% correctly reporting hyposmia and 36% incorrectly reporting normosmia. Conclusion Our analysis demonstrates higher than anticipated underreporting of preoperative hyposmia in patients undergoing ESBS as well as discrepancies between subjective and objective olfactory functions in the FESS population. The results highlight several gaps in knowledge regarding perioperative olfactory function that would be best examined with more thorough pre- and postoperative objective olfactory testing. This analysis demonstrates significant prognostic uncertainty for patients and providers and creates significant medicolegal uncertainty regarding the appropriate attribution of postoperative olfactory loss in cases without objective preoperative testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smell loss significantly impacts the quality of life in patients. However, there is limited research on smell loss in individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and the correlation between smell loss and cognitive impairment is unclear. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between smell loss and cognition impairment in ALS patients. Methods: The study included 216 ALS patients. The Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS Screen (ECAS) and smell identification test specifically for the Chinese population (CSIT) were administered to evaluate participants' cognitive and olfactory function, respectively. Results: After covarying for age, sex, BMI, education level, degree of hunger, dietary bias, eagerness for food, stress, smoking status, alcohol consumption, and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) or rhinitis, CSIT scores were significantly correlated with ECAS scores (r = 0.162, p = 0.028), especially the ALS‐specific scores (r = 0.158, p = 0.031). Even after excluding patients with URTI or rhinitis, the results were similar. CSIT scores were significantly correlated with ECAS scores (r = 0.224, p = 0.011), especially the ALS‐specific scores (r = 0.205, p = 0.019). Conclusion: In patients with ALS, smell loss is significantly correlated with cognitive impairment, particularly frontotemporal dysfunction. Cognitive dysfunction may lead to worse olfactory performance in ALS patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to follow the daily course of patients with olfactory dysfunction and healthy controls and to assess (i) how many times a day, (ii) at which time, and (iii) in which aspect of daily life participants are conscious about their sense of smell. Methods: In this longitudinal study, 49 patients with smell loss and 30 healthy participants were enrolled. Olfactory function was assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks. All participants received paper diaries designed for a 14-day period, featuring 12 rows representing 12 daily hours and six columns for various daily life aspects. They were instructed to mark their awareness of smell by indicating the relevant row and column in the diary. Following the return of the diaries, a second olfactory test was conducted within the patient group. Results: On average, patients were consciously aware of their sense of smell around 8 times daily, while healthy participants noted it about 6.5 times a day. Both groups primarily focused on their sense of smell during activities related to "eating," followed by considerations in "social life" and "personal hygiene." Interestingly, distinct patterns emerged: patients peaked in awareness at 8 a.m. and 7 p.m., whereas healthy individuals showed peaks at 6 a.m., 12 p.m., and 7 p.m. Despite regular diary use, we observed no improvement in patients' olfactory function or related quality of life. Conclusion: The olfactory diary is a valuable tool unveiling individual smell awareness patterns in patients with smell loss, aiding in counseling and patient management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An estimated 1 in 10 000 people are born without the ability to smell, a condition known as congenital anosmia, and about one third of those people have non‐syndromic, or isolated congenital anosmia (ICA). Despite the significant impact of olfaction for our quality of life, the underlying causes of ICA remain largely unknown. Using whole exome sequencing (WES) in 10 families and 141 individuals with ICA, we identified a candidate list of 162 rare, segregating, deleterious variants in 158 genes. We confirmed the involvement of CNGA2, a previously implicated ICA gene that is an essential component of the olfactory transduction pathway. Furthermore, we found a loss‐of‐function variant in SREK1IP1 from the family gene candidate list, which was also observed in 5% of individuals in an additional non‐family cohort with ICA. Although SREK1IP1 has not been previously associated with olfaction, its role in zinc ion binding suggests a potential influence on olfactory signaling. This study provides a more comprehensive understanding of the spectrum of genetic alterations and their etiology in ICA patients, which may improve the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of this disorder and lead to better understanding of the mechanisms governing basic olfactory function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Sudden smell loss is one of the early symptoms of COVID‐19. Although it is stated that the loss of smell and taste following COVID‐19 improves within a few weeks, there are also cases that do not improve for a long time. The aim of this study is to reveal long‐term smell loss experiences after COVID‐19. Methods: A qualitative approach was adopted. We conducted semistructured interviews with 11 participants who had smell loss for at least 3 months. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and evaluated using a thematic analysis for qualitative data. Results: Nutrition and appetite, personal hygiene, threats to safety and emotional changes were the main themes created by the authors and were the areas where participant expressions focused. The participants used oral/nasal corticosteroid therapy for smell loss and received short‐term olfactory training, but could not find a solution. Conclusions: Long‐term smell loss problems, which were neglected during the pandemic period, should be carefully evaluated due to their negative effects. Understanding and focusing on the negative effects of loss of smell may contribute to the solution of long‐term smell loss problems. Patient and Public Contribution: Eleven participants who experienced long‐term loss of smell following COVID‐19 contributed to the study. They enriched the study by describing the effects of their experiences. There was no other participation or contribution from the public to the research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Olfactory dysfunction is one of the most common symptoms of COVID‐19. In the first 2 years of the pandemic, it was frequently reported, although its incidence has significantly decreased with the emergence of the Omicron variant, which has since become the dominant viral strain. Nevertheless, many patients continue to suffer from persistent dysosmia and dysgeusia, making COVID‐19‐associated olfactory dysfunction an ongoing health concern. The proposed pathogenic mechanisms of COVID‐19‐associated olfactory dysfunction are complex and likely multifactorial. While evidence suggests that infection of sustentacular cells and associated mucosal inflammation may be the culprit of acute, transient smell loss, alterations in other components of the olfactory system (e.g., olfactory receptor neuron dysfunction, olfactory bulb injury and alterations in the olfactory cortex) may lead to persistent, long‐term olfactory dysfunction. This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of the epidemiology, clinical manifestations and current understanding of the pathogenic mechanisms of COVID‐19‐associated olfactory dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although previous studies have examined olfactory dysfunction in children, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has certainly had an unprecedented effect on their olfaction, which could not be taken into consideration. The aim of this report was to present data on the epidemiology of olfactory dysfunction during the pandemic and compare this dataset with a pre-pandemic set. We hypothesized an increase in URTI-related olfactory dysfunction. Methods: Data of paediatric patients consulting a smell and taste clinic between March 2020 and June 2022 were retrospectively analysed. The frequency of major causes of olfactory dysfunction was examined and compared with three subsets of an older dataset. Results: A total of 52 patients were included in the analysis. Most children presented with olfactory dysfunction due to upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) (52%). Congenital olfactory dysfunction was present in 34% of cases. Sinonasal disorders and idiopathic cases accounted for 6 and 4%, respectively, whereas head trauma was the least common cause (2%). This was in contrast with the results of the older set. The frequency of URTI-related olfactory dysfunction increased significantly. The frequency of head-trauma-related or congenital olfactory dysfunction showed marked reductions. There were no significant differences regarding the other aetiologies between our patient cohort and the three subsets. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in differences regarding the prevalence of aetiologies between our dataset and the subsets of pre-pandemic times. The surge of the frequency of URTI-related olfactory dysfunction may be ascribed to a novel pathomechanism involving sustentacular cells in the olfactory epithelium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With promising outcomes, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has recently been suggested as a treatment for olfactory dysfunction (OD). Methods: Clinical studies utilizing PRP in OD caused by COVID-19, trauma, anesthetic exposure, viral infection, and chronic rhinosinusitis were included in a systematic review. Results: Ten clinical studies were qualitatively analyzed. Six of these studies used the PRP for OD caused by COVID-19, one on OD after functional endoscopic sinus surgery, and three on post-infectious or post-trauma OD. The population included 531 patients, ranging in age from 15 to 63. Conclusion: The use of PRP may be a risk-free and efficient therapeutic option with very encouraging outcomes. Indeed, it enhances olfactory perception in patients who not only exhibit COVID-19 infection aftereffects, but also in those who have lost their sense of smell due to trauma, rhinosinusitis, rhinitis, or even surgery. To evaluate the PRP's therapeutic benefits in OD patients and to compare the efficacy of different therapeutic protocols with regard to treatment schedules, there is an urgent need for focused controlled trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common neurosensory manifestation in long COVID. An effective and safe treatment against COVID-19-related OD is needed. Methods: This pilot trial recruited long COVID patients with persistent OD. Participants were randomly assigned to receive short-course (14 days) oral vitamin A (VitA; 25,000 IU per day) and aerosolised diffuser olfactory training (OT) thrice daily (combination), OT alone (standard care), or observation (control) for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was differences in olfactory function by butanol threshold tests (BTT) between baseline and end-of-treatment. Secondary outcomes included smell identification tests (SIT), structural MRI brain, and serial seed-based functional connectivity (FC) analyses in the olfactory cortical network by resting-state functional MRI (rs–fMRI). Results: A total of 24 participants were randomly assigned to receive either combination treatment (n = 10), standard care (n = 9), or control (n = 5). Median OD duration was 157 days (IQR 127–175). Mean baseline BTT score was 2.3 (SD 1.1). At end-of-treatment, mean BTT scores were significantly higher for the combination group than control (p < 0.001, MD = 4.4, 95% CI 1.7 to 7.2) and standard care (p = 0.009) groups. Interval SIT scores increased significantly (p = 0.009) in the combination group. rs–fMRI showed significantly higher FC in the combination group when compared to other groups. At end-of-treatment, positive correlations were found in the increased FC at left inferior frontal gyrus and clinically significant improvements in measured BTT (r = 0.858, p < 0.001) and SIT (r = 0.548, p = 0.042) scores for the combination group. Conclusions: Short-course oral VitA and aerosolised diffuser OT was effective as a combination treatment for persistent OD in long COVID. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anosmia and hyposmia significantly affect patients' quality of life and have many etiologies, including trauma, inflammatory conditions including chronic rhinosinusitis, neoplasm, and viral infections, such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2. Objective: Our purpose was to establish whether a consensus exists regarding optimal management of olfactory dysfunction and to provide insight into the treatment of anosmia in the current climate of increased prevalence secondary to COVID-19. Thus, we aimed to systematically review the literature on the management of non-Chronic-rhinosinusitis- related anosmia/hyposmia. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published since January 1990 using terms combined with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). We included articles evaluating management of anosmia and hyposmia written in the English language, with original data, a minimum of 3 months of follow-up except for COVID-related studies, at least 2 patients, and well-defined and measurable outcomes. Results: A total of 3013 unique titles were returned upon the initial search. Of these, 297 abstracts were examined, yielding 19 full texts meeting inclusion criteria (8 with level 1 evidence, 3 with level 2, 1 with level 3, and 7 with level 4). The studies included a total of 1522 subjects, with follow up ranging from 3 to 72 months, with an exception for COVID related studies. Endpoints were based on clinically significant improvements of olfactory functions as measured through validated smell tests. Treatments with the most robust data were intranasal corticosteroids and olfactory training. Conclusion: The literature on the treatment of anosmia and hyposmia includes randomized trials showing the efficacy of a few modalities. While further research is needed to expand therapeutic options for this debilitating condition, the current literature supports the use of olfactory training and topical corticosteroids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The current study evaluated the use of platelet‐rich plasma (PRP), an autologous blood product with supraphysiologic concentrations of growth factors, in the treatment of prolonged coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19)–related smell loss. Methods: This multi‐institutional, randomized controlled trial recruited patients with COVID‐19 who had objectively measured smell loss (University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test [UPSIT] ≤ 33) between 6 and 12 months. Patients were randomized to three intranasal injections of either PRP or sterile saline into their olfactory clefts. The primary outcome measure was change in Sniffin' Sticks score (threshold, discrimination, and identification [TDI]) from baseline. The secondary end point measures included responder rate (achievement of a clinically significant improvement, ≥5.5 points TDI), change in individual TDI olfaction scores, and change in subjective olfaction via a visual analog scale. Results: A total of 35 patients were recruited and 26 completed the study. PRP treatment resulted in a 3.67‐point (95% CI: 0.05–7.29, p = 0.047) greater improvement in olfaction compared with the placebo group at 3 months and a higher response rate (57.1% vs 8.3%, odds ratio 12.5 [95% exact bootstrap confidence interval, 2.2–116.7]). There was a greater improvement in smell discrimination following PRP treatment compared with placebo but no difference in smell identification or threshold. There was no difference in subjective scores between PRP and placebo. No adverse effects were reported. Conclusion: Olfactory function following COVID‐19 can improve spontaneously after 6 months and can improve to a greater extent with PRP injection. These data build on the promise of PRP to be a safe potential treatment option for patients with COVID‐19–related smell loss, and larger‐powered studies will help further assess its efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of corticosteroid irrigation compared to saline to no nasal irrigation in COVID‐19 patients with olfactory loss. Design and Setting: A randomised controlled study was conducted at the Otolaryngology‐Head & Neck Surgery Department, Ramathibodi Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mahidol University. Participants: Two hundred thirty‐seven COVID‐19 participants with a new‐onset smell loss were recruited into the study. Two hundred twenty‐two participants met the inclusion criteria and were randomised into three groups: corticosteroid irrigation, saline irrigation and no treatment. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the mean difference in the smell sensation score among the groups after treatment at 1, 2 and 6 weeks. The secondary outcomes measurements included (1) a self‐rating quality of life (QOL)‐related smell dysfunction score, (2) the change over time in smell sensation score and self‐rating QOL‐related smell dysfunction score and (3) the median time to complete recovery of smell loss. Results: The mean differences in smell sensation scores among the three groups were not statistically significant at any follow‐up period. The mean score of self‐rating QOL‐related smell dysfunction in the corticosteroid group was significantly better than the other groups at 1 week. The change of outcome scores showed significant improvement over time, regardless of the treatments. The median time to complete smell recovery was similar: 3 weeks. Conclusion: This study emphasised that corticosteroid nasal irrigation is not superior to saline or no nasal irrigation in restoring the sense of smell in COVID‐19‐associated olfactory loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The mechanisms of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 are still unclear. In this review, we examine potential mechanisms that may explain why the sense of smell is lost or altered. Among the current hypotheses, the most plausible is that death of infected support cells in the olfactory epithelium causes, besides altered composition of the mucus, retraction of the cilia on olfactory receptor neurons, possibly because of the lack of support cell-derived glucose in the mucus, which powers olfactory signal transduction within the cilia. This mechanism is consistent with the rapid loss of smell with COVID-19, and its rapid recovery after the regeneration of support cells. Host immune responses that cause downregulation of genes involved in olfactory signal transduction occur too late to trigger anosmia, but may contribute to the duration of the olfactory dysfunction. The underlying mechanisms of the loss of smell in COVID-19 can be narrowed down to five plausible scenarios in the olfactory epithelium, which are not mutually exclusive. One series of mechanisms focuses on the primary target of SARS-CoV-2 in the olfactory epithelium, the support cells, which provide the mucus to dissolve odorants and the energy required for olfactory cilia to power olfactory signal transduction, as well as a putative maintenance factor for cilia. A second set of scenarios emphasizes changes in gene expression in olfactory receptor neurons, which may be linked to the loss of cilia, causing the neurons to become immature-like. Both viral and host factors modulate the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction, with the omicron variant preferring an endosomal route that enters support cells less efficiently, resulting in a relative sparing of olfaction in patients with this variant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Of those 85 patients, 14 patients (16.5%, male to female = 1:13, mean age 41.2 [16-67] years, mean pretreatment UPSIT score = 20.9 ± 7.5) identified parosmia as a major complaint after COVID-19 infection. Keywords: coronavirus 2019; COVID19; gabapentin; olfaction; olfactory dysfunction; parosmia; smell Loss EN coronavirus 2019 COVID19 gabapentin olfaction olfactory dysfunction parosmia smell Loss 1034 1036 3 05/29/23 20230601 NES 230601 INTRODUCTION Postviral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD) has significantly increased in incidence since the rise of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), resulting in anosmia (complete loss), hyposmia (partial loss), phantosmia (dysfunction of smell in the absence of an odor), or parosmia (distorted perception of smell) with limited evidence for proposed treatments.[[1]] Olfactory disorders have been linked with a negative impact on emotions, interpersonal relationships, and overall health, as well as increased mortality.[[3]] Parosmia, typically a foul or rotten odor, can be significantly distressing and dangerous as patients may no longer enjoy or tolerate previously pleasant or innocuous scents that they regularly encounter. Gabapentin improves parosmia after COVID-19 infection. [Extracted from the article]

The COVID‐19 pandemic caused by SARS‐CoV‐2 virus quickly spread globally, infecting over half a billion individuals, and killing over 6 million*. One of the more unusual symptoms was patients' complaints of sudden loss of smell and/or taste, a symptom that has become more apparent as the virus mutated into different variants. Anosmia and ageusia, the loss of smell and taste, respectively, seem to be transient for some individuals, but for others persists even after recovery from the infection. Causes for COVID‐19‐associated chemosensory loss have undergone several hypotheses. These include non‐functional or destroyed olfactory neurons and gustatory receptors or of their supporting cells, disruption of the signaling protein Neuropilin‐1, and disruption in the interaction with semaphorins, key molecules in the gustatory and olfactory axon guidance. The current paper will review these hypotheses and chart out potential therapeutic avenues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Smell disorders are common in the general population and occur e.g., after infections, trauma or idiopathically Treatment strategies for smell loss range from surgery, medication to olfactory training, depending on the pathology, but they are limited This study examined the effect of acupuncture on olfactory function. Methods: Sixty patients with smell loss following infections of the upper respiratory tract were included in this investigation Half of the study group were randomly assigned to verum acupuncture and the other half to sham acupuncture Olfaction was measured by means of the "Sniffin' Sticks" test battery (odour threshold, discrimination and identification). Results: Compared to sham acupuncture, verum was associated with an improvement of smell function as measured by the TDI score (p = 0.039) The improvement was largely determined by improvement in odour discrimination, and was significantly better in patients with a shorter duration of the disorder. Conclusion: The present results suggest that acupuncture is an effective supplementary treatment option for patients with olfactory loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Onset and duration of symptoms of loss of smell/taste in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review. A recent study also reported that COVID-19 patients had nearly double the average total SNOT-22 scores compared with the matched negative controls.10 Thus, the SNOT-22 instrument may be useful in measuring and following post-COVID-19 rhinologic symptoms and olfactory dysfunction. Keywords: comorbidities; COVID-19; duration; olfaction; outcomes; SARS-CoV2; severity; smell loss; SNOT22; taste loss EN comorbidities COVID-19 duration olfaction outcomes SARS-CoV2 severity smell loss SNOT22 taste loss 108 111 4 12/31/21 20220101 NES 220101 INTRODUCTION From the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, olfactory and taste dysfunction have been identified as key and distinctive presenting symptoms,1,2 but the evolution of these sensory deficits over time remains unclear. [Extracted from the article]

In recent months it has emerged that the novel coronavirus—responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic—causes reduction of smell and taste in a large fraction of patients. The chemosensory deficits are often the earliest, and sometimes the only signs in otherwise asymptomatic carriers of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The reasons for the surprisingly early and specific chemosensory dysfunction in COVID-19 are now beginning to be elucidated. In this hypothesis review, we discuss implications of the recent finding that the prevalence of smell and taste dysfunction in COVID-19 patients differs between populations, possibly because of differences in the spike protein of different virus strains or because of differences in the host proteins that enable virus entry, thus modifying infectivity. We review recent progress in defining underlying cellular and molecular mechanisms of the virus-induced anosmia, with a focus on the emerging crucial role of sustentacular cells in the olfactory epithelium. We critically examine the current evidence whether and how the SARS-CoV-2 virus can follow a route from the olfactory epithelium in the nose to the brain to achieve brain infection, and we discuss the prospects for using the smell and taste dysfunctions seen in COVID-19 as an early and rapid diagnostic screening tool. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The clinical course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) olfactory dysfunction remains poorly characterized, often limited by self‐reported measures. Given the logistical challenges of psychophysical testing, understanding the longitudinal relationship between self‐reported and quantitative measures can help accurately identify patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction. This study aimed to longitudinally correlate measured and subjective olfactory function in COVID‐19 subjects. Methods: A prospective, longitudinal study evaluating subjective and measured olfaction was conducted on ambulatory COVID‐19 subjects. Olfaction scores were obtained using a visual analogue scale (VAS) (0 = anosmia, 10 = normosmia) and the validated 12‐item Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT). Weekly testing was performed until recovery (BSIT ≥ 9/12 and/or VAS = 10/10) or study completion. Results: Eighty‐six polymerase chain reaction (PCR)‐positive COVID‐19 subjects were recruited ≤3 days from diagnosis and 52 completed longitudinal testing. Among those with self‐reported smell loss at recruitment, similar levels (75.8%) of objective (BSIT ≥ 9/12) and subjective recovery were obtained using a VAS cutoff ≥8, yet only 30.3% reported complete subjective recovery (VAS = 10). Median times to objective and complete subjective olfactory recovery were 12 ± 2.3 and 24 ± 3.5 days, respectively. Although both measures showed chemosensory improvement, the distributions of objective and full subjective olfactory recovery differed significantly (log rank test χ2 = 6.46, degrees of freedom [df] = 1, p = 0.011). Overall correlation between BSIT and VAS scores was moderate to strong across longitudinal follow‐up (rs = 0.41–0.65). Conclusion: Self‐reported and psychophysically measured COVID‐19 olfactory dysfunction improve at similar levels and are moderately correlated longitudinally, yet there is a significant delay in complete subjective recovery. Psychophysical testing in conjunction with qualitative assessments may be considered for counseling and follow‐up of patients with COVID‐19 smell loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social determinants of health (SDoH) include the socioeconomic, demographic, and social conditions that influence differences in health status among individuals and groups. The impact of these conditions on olfactory function remains poorly understood. In this scoping review, we systematically review the available literature to synthesize the association between SDoH and olfactory function. Methods: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA‐ScR) guidelines, we performed systematic search queries in PubMed, Embase, and Ovid databases and categorized articles according to themes that emerged regarding SDoH. The primary outcomes included self‐reported and objective measurements of smell. Results: We identified 722 unique references that underwent title and abstract review by two independent reviewers, with 70 articles undergoing full‐text review and 57 relevant for data extraction. Six themes emerged in our review, under which we categorized the studies and synthesized respective associations with olfactory function. These include studies exploring socioeconomic status (n = 19, 33%), education status (n = 27, 47%), occupational exposures (n = 26, 46%), racial/ethnic disparities (n = 12, 21%), and lifestyle/behavioral factors (n = 33, 58%). Conclusions: Within the context of this scoping review, olfactory dysfunction is significantly more prevalent in patients with lower socioeconomic status, exposure to environmental and occupational toxins, and of minority race/ethnicity, whereas the associations between olfactory dysfunction and education level and lifestyle factors such as smoking and drinking seem to be much more elusive. This review highlights the importance of accounting for SDoH in observational studies examining olfactory outcomes. Given the increased awareness of olfactory loss, special consideration should be given to understanding olfactory dysfunction in the context of these factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine the prevalence of objective gustatory (GD) and olfactory (OD) dysfunction in COVID-19 patients. Methods: This is a prospective, cross-sectional study of 51 COVID-19 positive patients diagnosed using RT-PCR-based testing. Of these study participants, 41 reported having present GD and OD at the time of enrollment and ten patients were without symptomatic OD and GD. All participants were objectively tested for OD by Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT) and for GD by Burghart taste strip test, which were mailed to the participants. The subjective presence and severity of COVID-19 symptoms of smell loss, loss of taste, nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea/mucus production, fever, cough and shortness of breath were also assessed. Results: Of the 41 patients with GD and OD, only 25.6% (10/39; p ≤ 0.0001) objectively presented GD and 39.1% (16/41; p ≤ 0.0001) OD at the time of their subjective dysfunction. Regarding GD, 23.1% (9/39) suffered from total hypogeusia, 2.6% (1/39) from ageusia. A significant loss of sour (33.3% (13/39)) and salty taste (17.9% (7/39)) could be recognized. Only 10.3% (4/39) showed a reduction in sweet and bitter taste. Concerning OD, 9.8% (4/41) showed a deficit relative to younger age in the BSIT and 29.3% (12/41) results abnormal relative to age. Conclusion: Subjective and objective findings in GD and OD differ significantly. Most patients suffering from objective dysgeusia present a deficit in sour and salty taste. Trial registration number: DRKS00021516; 22/04/2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Sudden loss of smell is a very common symptom of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). This study characterizes the structural and metabolic cerebral correlates of dysosmia in patients with COVID-19. Methods: Structural brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography with [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) were prospectively acquired simultaneously on a hybrid PET-MR in 12 patients (2 males, 10 females, mean age: 42.6 years, age range: 23–60 years) with sudden dysosmia and positive detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on nasopharyngeal swab specimens. FDG-PET data were analyzed using a voxel-based approach and compared with that of a group of healthy subjects. Results: Bilateral blocking of the olfactory cleft was observed in six patients, while subtle olfactory bulb asymmetry was found in three patients. No MRI signal abnormality downstream of the olfactory tract was observed. Decrease or increase in glucose metabolism abnormalities was observed (p <.001 uncorrected, k ≥ 50 voxels) in core olfactory and high-order neocortical areas. A modulation of regional cerebral glucose metabolism by the severity and the duration of COVID-19-related dysosmia was disclosed using correlation analyses. Conclusions: This PET-MR study suggests that sudden loss of smell in COVID-19 is not related to central involvement due to SARS-CoV-2 neuroinvasiveness. Loss of smell is associated with subtle cerebral metabolic changes in core olfactory and high-order cortical areas likely related to combined processes of deafferentation and active functional reorganization secondary to the lack of olfactory stimulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: COVID-19; nasal inflammation; olfactory dysfunction; smell loss EN COVID-19 nasal inflammation olfactory dysfunction smell loss 952 954 3 06/21/22 20220701 NES 220701 INTRODUCTION Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a hallmark symptom of the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), but the pathogenesis is unknown. IFN- is an independent risk factor associated with mortality in patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 infection. Taste and smell disorders in COVID-19 patients: role of interleukin-6. [Extracted from the article]

Olfactory disorders have been increasingly reported in individuals infected with SARS‐CoV‐2, the virus causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Losing the sense of smell has a strong impact on the quality of life, since it may lead to malnutrition, weight loss, food poisoning, depression, and exposure to dangerous chemicals. Individuals who suffer from anosmia (inability to smell) also cannot sense the flavor of food, which is a combination of taste and smell. Interestingly, infected individuals have reported sudden loss of smell with no congested nose, as is frequently observed in common colds or other upper respiratory tract infections. These observations suggest that SARS‐CoV‐2 infection leads to olfactory loss through a distinct mechanism, which is still unclear. This article provides an overview of olfactory loss and the recent findings relating to COVID‐19. Possible mechanisms of SARS‐CoV‐2‐induced olfactory loss are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused recurring and major outbreaks in multiple human populations around the world. The plethora of clinical presentations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been described extensively, of which olfactory dysfunction (OD) was established as an important and common extrapulmonary manifestation of COVID-19 infection. The aim of this protocol is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on peer-reviewed articles which described clinical data of OD in COVID-19 patients. Methods: This research protocol has been prospectively registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42020196202). CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed, as well as Chinese medical databases China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and WANFANG, will be searched using keywords including 'COVID-19', 'coronavirus disease', '2019-nCoV', 'SARS-CoV-2', 'novel coronavirus', 'anosmia', 'hyposmia', 'loss of smell', and 'olfactory dysfunction'. Systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Articles will be screened according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria to extract studies that include new clinical data investigating the effect of COVID-19 on olfactory dysfunction. Included articles will be reviewed in full; data including patient demographics, clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD, methods of olfactory assessment and relevant clinical outcomes will be extracted. Statistical analyses will be performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3. Discussion: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will aim to collate and synthesise all available clinical evidence regarding COVID-19-related OD as an important neurosensory dysfunction of COVID-19 infection. A comprehensive search strategy and screening process will be conducted to incorporate broad clinical data for robust statistical analyses and representation. The outcome of the systematic review and meta-analysis will aim to improve our understanding of the symptomatology and clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD and identify knowledge gaps in its disease process, which will guide future research in this specific neurosensory defect. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020196202. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Loss of smell and/or taste are cardinal symptoms of COVID-19. 'Long-COVID', persistence of symptoms, affects around one fifth of people. However, data regarding the clinical resolution of loss of smell and/or taste are lacking. In this study we assess smell and taste loss resolution at 4-6 week follow-up, aim to identify risk factors for persistent smell loss and describe smell loss as a feature of long-COVID in a community cohort in London with known SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM antibody status. We also compare subjective and objective smell assessments in a subset of participants.Methods: Four hundred sixty-seven participants with acute loss of smell and/or taste who had undergone SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM antibody testing 4-6 weeks earlier completed a follow-up questionnaire about resolution of their symptoms. A subsample of 50 participants completed an objective olfactory test and results were compared to subjective smell evaluations.Results: People with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with an acute loss of sense of smell and taste were significantly less likely to recover their sense of smell/taste than people who were seronegative (smell recovery: 57.7% vs. 72.1%, p = 0.027. taste recovery 66.2% vs. 80.3%, p = 0.017). In SARS-CoV-2 positive participants, a higher percentage of male participants reported full resolution of smell loss (72.8% vs. 51.4%; p < 0.001) compared to female participants, who were almost 2.5-times more likely to have ongoing smell loss after 4-6 weeks (OR 2.46, 95%CI 1.47-4.13, p = 0.001). Female participants with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and unresolved smell loss and unresolved taste loss were significantly older (> 40 years) than those who reported full resolution. Participants who experienced parosmia reported lower smell recovery rates and participants with distorted taste perception lower taste recovery rates. Parosmia had a significant association to unresolved smell loss (OR 2.47, 95%CI 1.54-4.00, p < 0.001).Conclusion: Although smell and/or taste loss are often transient manifestations of COVID-19, 42% of participants had ongoing loss of smell, 34% loss of taste and 36% loss of smell and taste at 4-6 weeks follow-up, which constitute symptoms of 'long-COVID'. Females (particularly > 40 years) and people with a distorted perception of their sense of smell/taste are likely to benefit from prioritised early therapeutic interventions.Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04377815 Date of registration: 23/04/2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Clinical diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is essential to the detection and prevention of COVID-19. Sudden onset of loss of taste and smell is a hallmark of COVID-19, and optimal ways for including these symptoms in the screening of patients and distinguishing COVID-19 from other acute viral diseases should be established. Methods We performed a case–control study of patients who were polymerase chain reaction–tested for COVID-19 (112 positive and 112 negative participants), recruited during the first wave (March 2020–May 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel. Patients reported their symptoms and medical history by phone and rated their olfactory and gustatory abilities before and during their illness on a 1–10 scale. Results  Changes in smell and taste occurred in 68% (95% CI, 60%–76%) and 72% (95% CI, 64%–80%) of positive patients, with odds ratios of 24 (range, 11–53) and 12 (range, 6–23), respectively. The ability to smell was decreased by 0.5 ± 1.5 in negatives and by 4.5 ± 3.6 in positives. A penalized logistic regression classifier based on 5 symptoms had 66% sensitivity, 97% specificity, and an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.83 on a holdout set. A classifier based on degree of smell change was almost as good, with 66% sensitivity, 97% specificity, and 0.81 AUC. The predictive positive value of this classifier was 0.68, and the negative predictive value was 0.97. Conclusions Self-reported quantitative olfactory changes, either alone or combined with other symptoms, provide a specific tool for clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. A simple calculator for prioritizing COVID-19 laboratory testing is presented here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine prevalence, severity, duration, and time from onset to diagnosis of general and Otorhinolaryngologic symptoms related to COVID-19 in whole disease spectrum: from mild to critical patients. Methods: All adult patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA found in nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs between March 10 and April 21, 2020 were surveyed by the authors for new onset symptoms during disease course. Demographic features, general symptoms, and Otorhinolaryngological symptoms were evaluated and compared by disease severity. Results: Of 223 included patients, 18.4% had mild, 61.4%; moderate, 14.3%; severe, and 5.8%; critical disease. Median age was 51 (range 20–93), 113 (50.7%) were male and 110 (49.3%) were female. The most common general symptoms were fatigue, cough, and fever with respective frequencies of 71.3%, 54.3%, and 50.7%. The most common Otorhinolaryngologic symptoms were taste loss, smell loss, and sore throat with respective frequencies of 34.5%, 31.8%, and 26%. Fatigue, fever, and dyspnea were more common in severe-critical patients compared to mild–moderate patients (p = 0.029, p = 0.016, and p < 0.001, respectively). Only smell loss was more common in mild–moderate group (p = 0.003). Prevalence of other symptoms did not differ between groups. Symptom durations and onset time to diagnosis varied. Conclusion: When compared to the previous studies, while general symptoms were less common, Otorhinolaryngologic symptoms were more common in our study population. Considering high infection risks, Otorhinolaryngologists should be aware of COVID-19 patients presenting with Otorhinolaryngologic complaints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smell dysfunction is highly prevalent worldwide and has adverse effects on quality of life. Smell loss in rhinitis subjects is mainly caused by mechanical obstruction of odorant transmission due to mucosal type 2 inflammation. We determined the association of 25‐hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels with the severity of smell dysfunction in children. Methods: We measured the olfactory threshold score in a total of 518 children (10‐12 years old, 264 boys) using the Sniffin' Sticks kit, and the children were divided into tertiles according to olfactory threshold score. We also assessed serum 25[OH]D level, common aeroallergen‐specific immunoglobulin E, rhinitis severity with visual analog scale, and the Total Four Symptom Score, and pre‐ and post‐decongestant nasal patency with acoustic rhinometry. Results: The children with 25(OH)D deficiency had significantly reduced mean olfactory threshold scores when compared to those with 25(OH)D levels of ≥20.0 ng/mL (6.56 ± 3.54 and 7.28 ± 3.87, respectively, P =.036). The proportion of loss of smell function and pre‐decongestant nasal patency significantly associated with low 25(OH)D levels (chi‐square trend test, P for trend =.007). Likewise, after adjustment for confounders, children with smell loss (third tertile) were significantly associated with low 25(OH)D level (aβ=−0.062, 95% CI=−0.064 to −0.060, P =.009) independent of aeroallergen sensitization, and a low pre‐decongestant nasal patency. Conclusions: 25‐Hydroxyvitamin D is significantly associated with smell dysfunction independent of aeroallergen sensitization, nasal obstruction, and the presence of allergic rhinitis. This finding may provide insight into the mechanisms involved in the development of olfactory dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although olfactory disorders (OD) are among the most significant symptoms of COVID-19, recovery time from COVID-19-related OD and their consequences on the quality of life remain poorly documented. We investigated the characteristics and behavioral consequences of COVID-19-related OD using a large-scale study involving 3111 French respondents (78% women) to an online questionnaire over a period of 9 months covering different epidemic waves (from 8 April 2020 to 13 January 2021). In the patients who subjectively recovered from COVID-19-related OD (N = 609), recovery occurred on average after 16 days and most of the time within 1 month ("normal" recovery range); 49 subjectively recovered in 1–2.5 months, and several cases took up to 6.5 months. Among the patients with ongoing OD (N = 2502), 974 were outside the "normal" recovery range (persistent OD) and reported OD for 1–10 months. Developing a persistent OD was more likely with increasing age and in women and was more often associated with parosmia and phantosmia. The deleterious impact of COVID-19-related OD on the quality of life was significantly aggravated by OD duration and was more pronounced in women. Because persistent OD is not infrequent after COVID-19, has deleterious consequences on the quality of life, and receives few solutions from the health practitioners, it would be beneficial to implement screening and treatment programs to minimize the long-term behavioral consequences of COVID-19-related OD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Commercially available smell tests are primarily used in research or in-depth clinical evaluations and are too costly and time-consuming for population surveillance in health emergencies like COVID-19. To address this need, we developed the SCENTinel 1.0 test, which rapidly evaluates 3 olfactory functions: detection, intensity, and identification. We tested whether self-administering the SCENTinel 1.0 test discriminates between individuals with self-reported smell loss and those with average smell ability (normosmic individuals) and provides performance comparable to the validated and standardized NIH Toolbox Odor Identification Test in normosmic individuals. Using Bayesian linear models and prognostic classification algorithms, we compared the SCENTinel 1.0 performance of a group of self-reported anosmic individuals (N = 111, 47 ± 13 years old, F = 71%) and normosmic individuals (N = 154, 47 ± 14 years old, F = 74%) as well as individuals reporting other smell disorders (such as hyposmia or parosmia; N = 42, 55 ± 10 years old, F = 67%). Ninety-four percent of normosmic individuals met our SCENTinel 1.0 accuracy criteria compared with only 10% of anosmic individuals and 64% of individuals with other smell disorders. Overall performance on SCENTinel 1.0 predicted belonging to the normosmic group better than identification or detection alone (vs. anosmic: AUC = 0.95, specificity = 0.94). Odor intensity provided the best single-feature predictor to classify normosmic individuals. Among normosmic individuals, 92% met the accuracy criteria at both SCENTinel 1.0 and the NIH Toolbox Odor Identification Test. SCENTinel 1.0 is a practical test able to discriminate individuals with smell loss and will likely be useful in many clinical situations, including COVID-19 symptom screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although the prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in children is thought to be lower compared to adults, little is known about the actual frequency of etiologies of smell dysfunction in children. Aim of the study was (i) to describe the epidemiology of olfactory dysfunction in a pediatric population and (ii) to compare the distribution of etiologies to adults. Material and methods: Data of patients consulting a smell and taste clinic between 2000 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Frequency of major causes of olfactory dysfunction was examined with a focus on the pediatric population. Results: A total of 7153 patients (164 children) were included in the analysis. Most children presented with congenital olfactory dysfunction (67%), or head-trauma (12%). In contrast, the cumulative frequency of olfactory loss associated with sinonasal disorders or acute infections of the upper airways was 6%. The frequency of etiologies of olfactory dysfunction changed with age: While the frequency of patients with congenital anosmia decreased, the frequency of causes related to infections of the upper respiratory tract and idiopathic causes increased. Conclusion: About 2/3 of olfactory dysfunction in children are congenital while 1/3 is acquired. The frequency of etiologies causing olfactory dysfunction change significantly from children to an adult population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acute loss of smell and taste are well‐recognized symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), yet the correlation between self‐reported and psychophysical olfactory function remains unclear. Understanding the reliability of self‐reported smell loss in ambulatory cases can assess the utility of this screening measure. Methods: A prospective, longitudinal study evaluating patient‐reported and measured olfactory function using the validated 12‐item Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT) was conducted on adult outpatients with COVID‐19. Patient‐reported olfaction scores using a visual analog scale (VAS) were obtained at baseline, time of COVID‐19 testing, and time of BSIT completion. Linear associations between VAS and BSIT were evaluated using Spearman's correlation coefficient and the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of VAS scores were calculated. Logistic regression identified characteristics associated with accurate assessment of olfactory function. Results: A total of 81 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)‐confirmed COVID‐19 positive subjects, of whom 54 self‐reported smell loss, were prospectively recruited ≤5 days from diagnosis date between May 8, 2020, and July 8, 2020. Self‐reported smell loss had good discriminative ability in identifying abnormal BSIT (area under receiver operating curve [AUC] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.92). A VAS <5 demonstrated sensitivity of 0.62 and specificity of 0.94 for predicting hyposmia (BSIT ≤8) with accuracy of 82.7%, whereas a VAS <9 had highest sensitivity at 0.86. Moderate bivariate linear associations were found between VAS and BSIT scores (rs = 0.59, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Self‐reported olfactory loss associated with COVID‐19 has a strong ability to predict abnormal olfactory function though the 2 measures are moderately correlated. Subjective olfactory assessment is useful in screening olfactory dysfunction at early disease time points when psychophysical testing cannot be conducted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The novel coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 is the causative agent of the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) outbreak. In addition to pneumonia, other COVID‐19‐associated symptoms have been reported, including loss of smell (anosmia). However, the connection between infection with coronavirus and anosmia remains enigmatic. It has been reported that defects in olfactory cilia lead to anosmia. In this Viewpoint, we summarize transmission electron microscopic studies of cilia in virus‐infected cells. In the human nasal epithelium, coronavirus infects the ciliated cells and causes deciliation. Research has shown that viruses such as influenza and Sendai attach to the ciliary membrane. The Sendai virus enters cilia by fusing its viral membrane with the ciliary membrane. A recent study on SARS‐CoV‐2–human protein–protein interactions revealed that the viral nonstructural protein Nsp13 interacts with the centrosome components, providing a potential molecular link. The mucociliary escalator removes inhaled pathogenic particles and functions as the first line of protection mechanism against viral infection in the human airway. Thus, future investigation into the virus–cilium interface will help further the battle against COVID‐19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rapid spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) virus has left many health systems around the world overwhelmed, forcing triaging of scarce medical resources. Identifying indicators of hospital admission for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients early in the disease course could aid the efficient allocation of medical interventions. Self‐reported olfactory impairment has recently been recognized as a hallmark of COVID‐19 and may be an important predictor of clinical outcome. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients presenting to a San Diego Hospital system with laboratory‐confirmed positive COVID‐19 infection was conducted with evaluation of olfactory and gustatory function and clinical disease course. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were performed to identify risk factors for hospital admission and anosmia. Results: A total of 169 patients tested positive for COVID‐19 disease between March 3 and April 8, 2020. Olfactory and gustatory data were obtained for 128 (75.7%) of 169 subjects, of which 26 (20.1%) of 128 required hospitalization. Admission for COVID‐19 was associated with intact sense of smell and taste, increased age, diabetes, and subjective and objective parameters associated with respiratory failure. On adjusted analysis, anosmia was strongly and independently associated with outpatient care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01‐0.74), whereas positive findings of pulmonary infiltrates and/or pleural effusion on chest radiograph (aOR 8.01; 95% CI, 1.12‐57.49) was strongly and independently associated with admission. Conclusion: Normosmia is an independent predictor of admission in COVID‐19 cases. Smell loss in COVID‐19 may be associated with a milder clinical course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rapid spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) and concern for viral transmission by ambulatory patients with minimal to no symptoms underline the importance of identifying early or subclinical symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection. Two such candidate symptoms include anecdotally reported loss of smell and taste. Understanding the timing and association of smell/taste loss in COVID‐19 may help facilitate screening and early isolation of cases. Methods: A single‐institution, cross‐sectional study evaluating patient‐reported symptoms with a focus on smell and taste was conducted using an internet‐based platform on adult subjects who underwent testing for COVID‐19. Logistic regression was employed to identify symptoms associated with COVID‐19 positivity. Results: A total of 1480 patients with influenza‐like symptoms underwent COVID‐19 testing between March 3, 2020, and March 29, 2020. Our study captured 59 of 102 (58%) COVID‐19–positive patients and 203 of 1378 (15%) COVID‐19–negative patients. Smell and taste loss were reported in 68% (40/59) and 71% (42/59) of COVID‐19–positive subjects, respectively, compared to 16% (33/203) and 17% (35/203) of COVID‐19–negative patients (p < 0.001). Smell and taste impairment were independently and strongly associated with COVID‐19 positivity (anosmia: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 10.9; 95% CI, 5.08‐23.5; ageusia: aOR 10.2; 95% CI, 4.74‐22.1), whereas sore throat was associated with COVID‐19 negativity (aOR 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11‐0.50). Of patients who reported COVID‐19–associated loss of smell, 74% (28/38) reported resolution of anosmia with clinical resolution of illness. Conclusion: In ambulatory individuals with influenza‐like symptoms, chemosensory dysfunction was strongly associated with COVID‐19 infection and should be considered when screening symptoms. Most will recover chemosensory function within weeks, paralleling resolution of other disease‐related symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Olfactory dysfunction is a prevalent problem with a significant impact on quality of life and increased mortality. Limited effective therapies exist. Platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous biologic product with anti‐inflammatory and neuroprotective effects. This novel pilot study evaluated the role of PRP on olfactory neuroregeneration in patients with hyposmia. Methods: Seven patients who had olfactory loss greater than 6 months in duration, no evidence of sinonasal inflammatory disease, and no improvement with olfactory training and budesonide topical rinses were enrolled in this preliminary study. Patients received a single intranasal injection of PRP into the mucosa of the olfactory cleft. The Sniffin' Sticks olfactory test consisting of threshold, discrimination, and identification measurements (TDI) was administered at the beginning of the study and at 1 and 3 months. Results: All patients reported a subjective improvement of their smell shortly after injection but then stabilized. At 3‐month post‐treatment, two patients with functional anosmia (TDI < 16) did not improve significantly. Five patients with hyposmia (TDI > 16 but <30) showed an improvement with 60% achieving normosmia (TDI > 30) at 3‐month follow‐up. On average, patients with baseline TDI > 16 improved by 5.85 points with the most significant improvement in the threshold subcomponent. There were no adverse outcomes from intranasal PRP injections. Conclusion: PRP appears safe for use in the treatment of olfactory loss, and preliminary data suggest possible efficacy, especially for those with moderate yet persistent loss. Further studies will help determine optimal frequency and duration of use. Level of evidence: 2B [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) can be associated with partial or total smell loss. Recent studies have suggested that olfactory outcome can be positively modulated after olfactory training (OT). This study's aim was to investigate OT's potential role in smell recovery after TBI-induced olfactory loss. A prospective, randomized, and controlled study was developed. Patients with TBI-induced olfactory dysfunction (n = 42) were randomized into an experimental group with OT and a control group without (nOT). OT was performed twice daily with a six odor training set during 12 weeks. Olfactory loss was assessed using subjective olfactometry (Barcelona Smell Test [BAST] 24), a visual analogue scale (VAS), and n-butanol threshold (n-BTt) at baseline at 4, 12, and 24 weeks. Additionally, patients underwent MRI of the olfactory brain and olfactory bulbs (OB). Based on the MRI results, an overall score (0–16) was developed to associate the structural neurological damage with olfactory outcomes. The primary outcome was the change in olfactory measurements (VAS and BAST-24) between baseline and 12 weeks. The secondary outcome was the association of the MRI score with olfactory outcomes at baseline, and the impact on quality of life (QoL). After 12 weeks of training, OT patients showed a significant improvement in n-BTt (0.6 ± 1.7 OT vs. -0.6 ± 1.8 nOT, p < 0.05), but not in the smell VAS and BAST-24 scores. Olfactory outcomes (VAS, BAST-24, and n-BTt) were significantly associated with MRI structural findings (p < 0.001), but not with the OB volume or olfactory sulcus length. The present study suggests that 12 weeks of OT mildly improves the olfactory threshold in TBI, whereas the overall MRI score may be used as an imaging marker of olfactory dysfunction and disease severity in TBI patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Olfactory function can be influenced by many factors and olfactory dysfunction is associated with several diseases. But even considering this, the causes of acquired olfactory dysfunction in children are not well understood. This review was conducted to gain an overview of the etiologies of acquired olfactory dysfunction in a pediatric population. Studies were identified using a predefined literature search, including studies if patients were ≤18 years of age and results of psychophysical olfactory testing were reported. A total of 44 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review and were included in the qualitative analysis. The influence of 6 disease groups on olfactory function in children was observed (otorhinolaryngology, traumatic brain injury, oncology, psychiatric diseases, environmental factors, and other diseases). The current literature is convincing that diseases in the otorhinolaryngology group and traumatic brain injury can lead to acquired olfactory dysfunction, whereas according to the current literature, the role of other influencing factors such as most psychiatric disorders remains uncertain. A number of diseases and circumstances affect olfactory function in children and may cause acquired olfactory dysfunction in this age group. Nevertheless, more research is needed to better understand the causes of acquired olfactory dysfunction in children. Future research should have the goal of early diagnosis and, if possible, early treatment of the condition to prevent a negative impact of olfactory dysfunction on children and adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For the visual and auditory senses, an array of studies has reported on neuronal reorganization processes after sensory loss. In contrast to this, neuroplasticity has been investigated only scarcely after loss of the olfactory sense. The present review focuses on the current extent of literature on structural and functional neuroplasticity effects after loss, with a focus on magnetic resonance imaging–based studies. We also include findings on the regain of the olfactory sense, for example after successful olfactory training. Existing studies indicate that widespread structural changes beyond the level of the olfactory bulb occur in the brain after loss of the olfactory sense. Moreover, on a functional level, loss of olfactory input not only entails changes in olfaction-related brain regions but also in the trigeminal system. Existing evidence should be strengthened by future longitudinal studies, a more thorough investigation of the neuronal consequences of congenital anosmia, and the application of state-of-the-art neuroimaging methods, such as connectivity analyses and joint analyses of brain structure and function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The severity of sensory involution during aging is critical for perceiving and recognizing the world. In addition, sensory deficits significantly increase the risk of older adults' biological, mental, and social decline. Conversely, the loss of smell is an early biomarker of neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's (AD) and Parkinson's diseases. The worsening of these neurodegenerative diseases also involves physical deterioration, social deficits, and isolation. In the present translational work, a new food finding test (FFT) olfactory paradigm without food deprivation was used to investigate olfaction in old animals. The effects of social isolation in 12-months-old female 3xTg-AD mice, a genetic model of AD, and their age-matched wild-type counterparts, the gold-standard C57BL/6 mice, were also studied. The animals were placed in a test cage and were observed until reaching the criteria for three goal-directed behaviors, 'Sniffing', 'Finding' and 'Eating', towards the hidden food. Video recordings were analyzed blind to the genotype and social condition in order to determine the behaviors' ethogram and functional correlations. The results showed that the FFT paradigm without food deprivation elicited longer ethograms than previously reported with the standard overnight food deprivation protocol. However, it identified the genotype-dependent olfactory signatures in normal and AD-pathological aging. Social isolation slightly increased the latencies, but the olfactory signatures were preserved. However, a functional derangement was detected since the internal correlation among the three goal-directed behaviors was lost under isolation. In conclusion, the new paradigm without overnight deprivation was sensitive to genotype and isolation changes in the ethogram and function and can be used to study old animals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) significantly impacts olfaction. However, the relationship between objective olfaction and patient-reported olfactory-specific quality of life (QOL) is not well understood. Furthermore, objective olfactory testing can be time consuming, so we sought to determine if patient-reported olfactory QOL can be used as screening tool for olfactory dysfunction. Methods Olfactory dysfunction was evaluated in 109 patients with CRS using the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (QOD-NS) and the Sniffin' Sticks Test, assessing for olfactory threshold, discrimination, identification, and overall composite scores (TDI; composite score of threshold, discrimination, and identification). Regression analysis was performed to correlate olfactory metrics and patient and disease-specific factors with QOD-NS scores. Optimal QOD-NS scores to classify patients based upon objective olfactory function were established. Results Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses of QOD-NS and CRS-associated comorbidities, objective measures of disease, demographics, and CRS-specific QOL were performed. Non-white race, depression, and worse 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores correlated with worse QOD-NS scores ( p < 0.005). Worse TDI scores correlated with worse QOD-NS scores, and discrimination had the strongest correlation ( p < 0.001). Mean ± standard deviation (SD) QOD-NS scores for normosmia, hyposmia, and anosmia were 44 ± 7.2, 35.7 ± 12.8, and 31.6 ± 10.7, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed an area under the curve of 0.770 ( p < 0.001), and a QOD-NS cutoff of 38.5 to have maximal Youden's index to define normal vs abnormal TDI score. Conclusion In CRS, QOD-NS correlates with non-white race, depression, SNOT-22, and TDI score, with discrimination having the strongest correlation. The QOD-NS also appears to be a feasible tool for olfaction screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Published data examining the efficacy of olfactory training (OT) has used standardized concentrations of odorants and the Sniffin' Sticks testing method. Although well-validated, these methods are costly and time-intensive for the average otolaryngology practice. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of using essential oils at random concentrations and the University of Pennsylvania Smell Test (UPSIT) for training and testing, and compare this with the existing data on OT. Study Design Randomized Clinical TrialMethods: Patients presenting to a tertiary care rhinology center with subjective loss of smell and olfactory loss measured by UPSIT were randomized to OT or control for 6 months. Only patients with loss of smell greater than one-year duration, and loss associated with post-infectious and idiopathic etiologies were included. Baseline UPSIT was compared to 6-month UPSIT. An accepted 10% change or better was used to establish a significant improvement on UPSIT. Results 43 patients were enrolled. Eight patients were lost to follow-up, with a total of 35 completing the study. Age ranged from 39-71 with an average of 56. Of 19 patients in the OT group, 6 showed significant improvement (32%), while only two out of 16 patients (13%) in the control group improved. Increasing age and duration of loss were significantly correlated to lack of improvement. Conclusion Allowing patients to use random concentrations of essential oils to perform OT is as effective as published data using controlled concentrations of odorants for post-infectious and idiopathic olfactory loss. Level of Evidence 1b. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: coronavirus; gustatory; olfactory; smell loss; taste loss EN coronavirus gustatory olfactory smell loss taste loss 397 398 2 02/17/22 20220301 NES 220301 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS N/A. CONFLICT OF INTEREST All authors declare no conflicts of interest. In the study, the authors observed a significantly higher ( I p i =0.001) mean cycle threshold (Ct) value of RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 among patients with (28.13±4.55) OD compared to their counterparts without OD (26.91±4.49). A similar pattern was observed in patients with GD, where the mean Ct value was significantly higher ( I p i =0.002) in patients with GD (28.16±4.52) compared to patients without GD (27.01±4.52). [Extracted from the article]

Demographic data collected included gender (female/male), age, respiratory problems, fatigue, history of COVID-19 infection, months post-COVID-19 infection, and smell test score. Previous COVID-19 infection was defined as having a positive COVID-19 test (RT-PCR or antigen test) or self-reported. Keywords: Brooklyn; New York; children; COVID-19; smell loss EN Brooklyn New York children COVID-19 smell loss 128 129 2 12/17/21 20220101 NES 220101 Common symptoms of acute COVID-19 infection include fever, cough, headache, shortness of breath, and anosmia, i.e., partial, or complete loss of smell.1 Prior literature reported that COVID-19 patients (50%) developed sudden-onset anosmia prior to respiratory symptoms, thus making this an important symptom.2 The aim of this study sought to identify post-COVID-19 related olfactory dysfunction and recovery rates in children and adults in a community with a high incidence of COVID-19 infection. [Extracted from the article]

The sense of smell is interrelated with psychosocial functioning. Olfactory disorders often decrease quality of life but treatment options for people with olfactory loss are limited. Additionally, olfactory loss accompanies and precedes psychiatric and neurodegenerative diseases. Regular, systematic exposure to a set of odors, i.e., olfactory training (OT) has been offered for rehabilitation of the sense of smell in clinical practice. As signals from the olfactory bulb are directly projected to the limbic system it has been also debated whether OT might benefit psychological functioning, i.e., mitigate cognitive deterioration or improve emotional processing. In this review we synthesize key findings on OT utility in the clinical practice and highlight the molecular, cellular, and neuroanatomical changes accompanying olfactory recovery in people with smell loss as well as in experimental animal models. We discuss how OT and its modifications have been used in interventions aiming to support cognitive functions and improve well-being. We delineate main methodological challenges in research on OT and suggest areas requiring further scientific attention. • Olfaction is connected with social functioning. Smell loss may lower life quality. • Regular exposure to odors (olfactory training, OT) is used in smell rehabilitation. • We review OT effects on behavioral, neuroanatomical, cellular and molecular levels. • We discuss OT utility in supporting cognitive and emotional functioning. • We delineate main methodological challenges of research on OT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Smell loss (hyposmia) inhibits flavor perception and influences food intake. To compensate for flavor loss, some patients with hyposmia appear to increase salt usage. The purpose of this study was to compare self-reported salt usage in patients with hyposmia with that in normal volunteers. Methods: Salt usage was compared in 56 patients with hyposmia but with normal taste function with that in 27 normal volunteers. Salt usage was formulated with respect to 1) a standard quantitative salt intake scale, 2) salt addition related to food intake, 3) intake of foods and beverages with high salt content, and 4) salt intake related to presence or absence of hypertension. Results: Eighteen (32%) of the 56 patients self-reported increased salt usage; they were labeled "increased users." The other 38 hyposmic patients (68%) did not report increased salt usage; they were labeled "non-changers." Increased users estimated their salt usage rose an average 2.8 times that experienced before their hyposmia onset. They also reported adding salt to their food before tasting it and ate more highly salted foods than did the non-changers. Salt usage was not increased further among increased users with hypertension but was increased further among non-changers with hypertension. Conclusions: Salt usage is increased among some patients with hyposmia presumably to enhance flavor perception to compensate for diminished flavor perception related to loss of smell. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conclusion. Allergy does not modify the symptoms and steroid consumption (oral and local) of nasal polyposis (NP) patients after functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). Objectives. To assess the role of allergy in the evolution after FESS of patients presenting with the diagnosis of NP. Patients and methods. This was a prospective study of 63 consecutive patients with NP (57% males, mean age 45.8 years), who were analyzed to detect whether the results of a surgical treatment of NP were influenced by the presence of positive allergic tests (Phadiatop®). Three nasal criteria were scored: nasal obstruction, posterior rhinorrhea, and the loss of smell. The frequency of asthma was evaluated. Medical treatment of NP after FESS consisted of washing of the nasal cavities, steroid spray, and oral steroid administration. The amount of consumption of steroids (prednisolone and beclomethasone) was studied. Results. Decrease of all nasal symptoms was not statistically different in the two groups of patients with and without allergy. Cumulative consumption of prednisolone and beclomethasone after surgery was similar in the two groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The sniff magnitude test (SMT) is a reliable and rapid clinical test of olfactory function that is minimally dependent on cognitive and linguistic abilities. In this study, we compared performance on the SMT and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) in samples of children and nonnative English speakers. Previous research has shown that these populations perform poorly on the UPSIT as compared with young, healthy U.S. adults. Such performance differences may reflect variations in memory/cognition and language/culture rather than olfactory abilities. The UPSIT scores of children and of Indian and Chinese graduate students were found to be lower than those of young U.S. adults. By contrast, these groups did not perform more poorly than U.S. adults did on the SMT. The results are consistent with findings from our studies, with the elderly showing that performance on the UPSIT, but not the SMT, is significantly correlated with measures of memory, language and other cognitive abilities. The findings highlight the utility of the SMT when evaluating the olfactory ability of the very young, older adults and people with diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]