Smell loss associated with SARS-CoV-2 is not clinically different from other viruses: a multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the prevalence of cases with olfactory loss, other respiratory viruses can also cause this condition. We aimed to compare the prevalence of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and other respiratory viruses in patients with sudden smell loss, and to assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 viral load and co-infection on olfactory symptoms. METHODS: Patients with sudden smell loss were recruited in a multicenter prospective cohort study in 15 hospitals in Brazil. Clinical questionnaire, Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) olfactory test and nasopharyngeal swab to perform a PCR-based respiratory viral panel were collected at first visit (day 0) and 30 and 60 days after recruitment. RESULTS: 188 of 213 patients presented positive test result for SARS-CoV-2, among which 65 were co-infected with other respiratory viruses (e.g., rhinovirus, enterovirus, and parainfluenza). 25 had negative test results for SARS-CoV-2. Patients in both SARSCoV-2 and non-SARS-CoV-2 groups had objective anosmia (less than 2 points according to the psychophysical olfactory CCCRC) at day 0, with no significant difference between them. Both groups had significant smell scores improvement after 30 and 60 days, with no difference between them. Co-infection with other respiratory viruses, and SARS-CoV-2 viral load did not impact olfactory scores. CONCLUSION: Patients with sudden smell loss associated with SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses had similar presentation, with most participants initiating with anosmia, and total or near total recovery after 60 days. SARS-CoV-2 viral load and co-infections with other respiratory viruses were not associated with poorer olfactory outcomes.

European position paper on diagnostic tools in rhinology.

The accurate diagnosis of rhinologic disease depends on the clinical history, examination findings and, in many cases, further investigations. There are a wide variety of diagnostic tests available, the choice of which depends upon the condition being assessed. This position paper is intended to provide an up-to-date comprehensive description of the diagnostic tools available to rhinologists, allergists, general otolaryngologists and other physicians with an interest in sinonasal disease. The literature has been reviewed and evidence-based recommendations are included. The relevant history and examination techniques are described, including endoscopic assessment of the nose. General and disease-specific quality of life instruments are an important tool in assessing the impact of rhinologic disease and the response to treatment. Relevant blood tests are discussed, as well as the various methods of allergy testing. Techniques for collecting microbiological and tissue samples are described, as well as the use of more specialised tests such as nasal nitric oxide and those evaluating ciliary structure and function. Imaging techniques and their indications are included. Chemosensory (smell and taste) testing is explained, and the available techniques for objective measurement of nasal airflow and patency are reviewed. Prompt and accurate diagnosis allows appropriate management to be initiated; an understanding of the currently available diagnostic tools is a vital part of the assessment of rhinologic disease.

Environmental exposure to dioxin: the Seveso experience.

The toxicity in humans of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, a man-made compound and environmental pollutant, is still debated. The industrial accident at Seveso, Italy, in 1976 exposed a large population of both sexes and of all ages to a massive concentration of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. Monitoring of soil and measurement of blood samples allowed classification of the exposed population into three categories: A, B and R (high, medium and low exposure, respectively). This article presents data from longitudinal health monitoring of the population, including liver function, immune function, neurological impairment, dermatological effects, reproductive pathology, and mortality.

Cytochrome P450 1B1 mRNA measured in blood mononuclear cells by quantitative reverse transcription-PCR.

Cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1B1 activates polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and aryl aromatic hydrocarbons to carcinogens. We describe a competitive reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) assay for the quantification of CYP1B1 mRNA in blood mononuclear cells (BMCs) by simultaneous RT and PCR amplification of cellular RNA with decreasing amounts of an internal standard. The concentration of CYP1B1 mRNA is derived from the ratio between the intensities of the bands corresponding to the amplified products. To reduce the variability of mRNA extraction efficiency, the measured amount of CYP1B1 has been calculated in relation to the beta-actin gene products. We measured CYP1B1 expression in the BMCs of 75 human subjects; no significant differences in the CYP1B1:beta-actin ratio were detected between women (range, 0.47-4.35; median, 2.0) and men (range, 0.72-3.85; median, 2.09). The analytical imprecision (CV) of duplicates was 14% (n = 25 pairs), and the intraindividual CV for two samples, 1 month apart, was 22% (n = 20). No significant differences were detected in smokers (n = 25; range, 0.77-3.55; median, 2.14) compared with nonsmokers (n = 50; range, 0.47-4.35; median, 2.0). The method has a wide range of linearity, good sensitivity and precision, and is suitable for studies of individual susceptibility as indicated by CYP1B1 expression in BMCs.