Search

Background Previous studies provided the first evidence that the importance of olfaction decreases with the duration of olfactory dysfunction (OD).Objective To evaluate differences in olfactory-related quality of life (QoL) between patients with new-onset and persistent smell loss (>4 weeks) during the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic and patients with persistent postinfectious OD (PIOD) that were recruited before the pandemic.Methods This was a retrospective study that included 149 patients with self-reported OD. The olfactory-related QoL was measured using the questionnaire of OD (QOD). The QOD measures the degree to which patients (i) adjust and cope with smell loss (QOD-positive statement [QOD-PS]), (ii) suffer from distorted odor perceptions (QOD-parosmia [QOD-PAR]), and (iii) suffer from smell loss in general (QOD-negative statement [QOD-NS]). Self-perceived chemosensory function, demographics, olfactory function, and duration of smell loss were evaluated. Analyses of variance were used to depict differences in QoL-outcomes between different OD groups.Results All patients included during the COVID-19 pandemic reported an extensive loss of chemosensory functions of smell, taste, and flavor perception. Psychophysical retronasal screening testing showed olfactory impairments in more than half of these patients. One-way analysis of variance and posthoc tests revealed that the QOD-NS was significantly higher in the new-onset OD group than the PIOD group. At the same time, the QOD-PS score was significantly higher in the PIOD and the persistent COVID-19 OD group than in the new-onset OD group.Conclusion We showed that patients with persistent OD experienced better olfactory-related adjustment and lower QoL-impairment scores than those with recent-onset smell loss, suggesting that the olfactory-related QoL might change as a function of time after symptom onset.

Objectives: Tests for gustatory function have become increasingly important in diagnosis and treatment of patients with taste disorders. While caffeine and quinine hydrochloride solutions have been used for global testing of bitter perception, only quinine has been used to test regional bitter perception by means of taste strips. The aim of the present study was to validate caffeine impregnated taste strips as an alternative to quinine taste strips for assessment of regional bitter perception.Methods: A total of 46 healthy volunteers (mean age/range, 23/19-27 years) were included in this study. Quinine and caffeine impregnated taste strips were pairwise presented at different parts of the tongue. Perceived intensity and hedonic dislike were evaluated using labeled magnitude scales. Additionally, gustatory function was assessed using the taste strips test and overall sense of taste was rated using visual analog scales.Results: Assessment of gustatory function demonstrated scores within the normogeusic range in most included subjects (mean/SD, 13.1/2.5). Notably, equally concentrated quinine and caffeine impregnated taste strips placed on different regions of the tongue did not lead to significant differences in perceived intensity or hedonic dislike, whereas quinine and caffeine impregnated taste strips of different concentrations placed on the same region on the tongue led to significant differences of perceived intensity and hedonic dislike. Furthermore, no correlation was found between self-assessment of gustatory function and taste strips scores.Conclusion: Caffeine seems to be a valid bitter compound for regional testing using taste strips and may be used alternatively to quinine.

Background: Dupilumab is a monoclonal antibody against interleukin 4 receptor alpha and has proven to be clinically effective in treating patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). However, a certain number of patients are non- or partial responders. This study aims to investigate the relevance of inflammatory markers with regard to therapy response to dupilumab in CRSwNP patients. Methods: All patients with CRSwNP treated with dupilumab at a tertiary healthcare center with available pretreatment inflammatory markers were included. The values of pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were associated with the outcome. Patients were stratified according to the respective median value (> median was considered high). The binary logistic regression was performed with regard to total treatment response (post-treatment total nasal polyp score (NPS) 0). Results: A total of 65 CRSwNP patients with available pretreatment peripheral blood values were included in the study. The mean pre- and post-treatment total NPS values were 4.3 ± 1.9 and 1.2 ± 1.6, respectively. High PLR (> 131.2) was independently associated with a 3.9-fold higher probability of reaching the NPS value of 0 in the multivariable analysis. On the other hand, High NLR (> 1.9) did not significantly associate with the outcome. Conclusions: The current study provides insights into the potential positive predictive value of the high PLR (> 131.2) in CRSwNP patients regarding treatment with dupilumab. There is a need for further prospective studies for validation of these results, especially in cohorts of patients with severe CRSwNP.

Background: Dupilumab significantly improves symptom control in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Patients with large polyps at the initiation of treatment (total polyp score (TPS) ≥ 5) have been the focus in published studies. Patients with significant burden of disease but small polyps (TPS ≤ 4) have not yet been evaluated for clinical response. This study set out to evaluate the benefit of dupilumab treatment on cohorts of small (TPS ≤ 4) compared to large polyps (TPS ≥ 5). Furthermore, benefit of concomitant oral and/or nasal steroid therapy has been evaluated. Methods: 97 patients with CRSwNP, who were begun on dupilumab between January 2020 and October 2021, were included. All patients were followed-up for 6 months. At each visit they underwent nasal endoscopy, smell identification tests and filled out validated patient questionnaires. Results: Significant drops in TPS were seen in both patient groups after 6 months of therapy, dropping from a median score of 3 to 0 and from 6 to 2 in patients with small and large polyps respectively. Furthermore, a linear mixed model calculated a drop of 22% and 24% in TPS per month in patients with small and large polyps respectively with no significant difference in rate of decline. Finally the model showed that neither oral nor nasal steroids influenced the rate of response to dupilumab therapy. Conclusions: Polyp size at the initiation of dupilumab therapy and whether patients continue to take steroid therapy does not appear to influence effectiveness of dupilumab treatment.

Despite the understanding of this disease entity, challenges persist in the long-term treatment of RVO-related complications and visual loss. This review provided a detailed summary on the rationality and efficacy of recently developed treatment regimes and evaluated the potential benefit of combination therapy.

Central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC) is a complicated disease with still unclear causes, pathogenesis and management strategy despite active research. CSC has been traditionally considered as a self-limiting disease where spontaneous recovery occurs in 90 of the patients within a few months. This proclaimed “benign” nature of CSC, however, has been queried by increasing scientific evidence that permanent photoreceptors damage and neurosensory-cystoid degeneration of macula occur in the event of chronic CSC. CSC is probably not a benign disease. Treatments for CSC are still evolving. It is very difficult to define the proper timing for active treatment of CSC because it is not easy to define a universally accepted cut-off time point for active intervention. There is a recent suggestion that active CSC treatment should be considered if symptoms last longer than 3 months as atrophy of photoreceptors may occur as early as 4 months after initial presentation. The CSC patients may be stratified into two groups based on the initial presenting visual acuity and duration of symptom: the good visual prognosis group and the dubious visual prognosis group. The management may then be tailor-made based on the visual prognosis group. “Safety-enhanced"” photodynamic therapy (PDT) using lower doses and reduced fluence is still the mainstay of treatment. Newer treatment modalities like intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy, micropulsed diode laser treatment, and the use of corticosteroid antagonists do warrant further investigation. Combination therapies involving two or more of the above modalities of treatments may have a role to play in this actively researched area.

The purpose of this article is to review the role of intravitreal injections of medications in the treatment of the two common macular diseases, macular edema and age related macular degeneration (AMD). We perform literature search by search engine Pubmed till May 2011, using keywords "intravitreal injections", "age-related macular degeneration" and "macular edema" to retrieve relevant review articles and original papers. To conclude, with advance in technology, intravitreal injections of medications may have become an integral part of our ability to treat a wide range of macular diseases. The use of ranibizumab, pegaptanib in the treatment of neovascular AMD and TA in the treatment of various causes of macular edema have shown promising results in a number of prospective randomized controlled trials, with low risk of complications reported.

Real-world evidence (RWE) is a valuable instrument to better understand the patient journey and effectiveness of therapies. RWE on the prevalence of uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and CRS natural course of disease across Europe is scarce. In addition, there is limited RWE that enables comparison of the effectiveness of marketed therapies including topical or systemic corticosteroids, sinus surgery, or biologics.

No abstract.