Coronavirus disease 2019 related parosmia: an exploratory survey of demographics and treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical features, therapeutic efficacy and symptom time course of post-coronavirus disease 2019 parosmia. METHODS: A 22-item online questionnaire was distributed to AbScent research group and Facebook coronavirus disease 2019 anosmia group adult members to assess clinical features, interventions and their subjective efficacy for parosmia. RESULTS: A total of 209 participants (86 per cent females) reported: smell loss on average 3 days after coronavirus symptoms, recovery 4 weeks later, and first parosmia symptoms 12 weeks post infection. Respondents reported 10 per cent body weight loss, and listed onion and garlic as significant parosmia triggers. Regarding quality of life, depression was the most cited item (54 per cent). Smell training was trialled by 74 per cent of participants, followed by nasal corticosteroid spray (49 per cent). Stellate ganglion block, trialled by 16 per cent of respondents, had the highest reported improvement (45 per cent), with 21 per cent reporting a sustained benefit - the highest rate amongst registered treatment options. CONCLUSION: Post-coronavirus parosmia has a significant impact and remains challenging to treat. Stellate ganglion block appears to be successful relative to other reported treatments. Further research into the pathophysiology, efficacy and mechanism of stellate ganglion block effect is warranted.

The UK national registry of ENT surgeons with coronavirus disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: ENT surgeons are likely to be at high risk of coronavirus disease 2019 exposure. METHODS: A national registry of UK ENT surgeons with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 was created with the support of ENT UK. Voluntary entry was made by either the affected individual or a colleague, using a web-based platform. RESULTS: A four-month data collection period is reported, comprising 73 individuals. Coronavirus disease 2019 was test-confirmed in 35 respondents (47.9 per cent). There was a need for hospitalisation in two cases (2.7 per cent) and tragically one individual died. Symptom onset peaked in March. The majority suspected their exposure to have been in the workplace, with a significant proportion attributing their disease to a lack of personal protective equipment at a time before formal guidance had been introduced. CONCLUSION: The registry suggests that a significant number of ENT clinicians in the UK have contracted coronavirus disease 2019, and supports the need for tailored personal protective equipment guidance and service planning.

Patterns of smell recovery in 751 patients affected by the COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Post-viral olfactory dysfunction is well established and has been shown to be a key symptom of COVID-19 with more than 66% of European and US patients reporting some degree of loss of smell. Persistent olfactory dysfunction appears to be commonplace and will drive the demand for general practitioner, otolaryngology or neurology consultation in the next few months - evidence regarding recovery will be essential in counselling our patients. METHODS: This was a prospective survey-based data collection and telemedicine follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 751 patients completed the study, of whom 477 were females and 274 males. The mean age of the patients was 41 ± 13 years (range 18-60). There were 621 patients (83%) who subjectively reported a total loss of smell and 130 (17%) a partial loss. After a mean follow-up of 47 ± 7 days (range 30-71) from the first consultation, 277 (37%) patients still reported a persistent subjective loss of smell, 107 (14%) reported partial recovery and 367 (49%) reported complete recovery. The mean duration of the olfactory dysfunction was 10 ± 6 days (range 3-31) in those patients who completely recovered and 12 ± 8 days (range 7-35) in those patients who partially recovered. CONCLUSIONS: According to our results, at this relatively early point in the pandemic, subjective patterns of recovery of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients are valuable for our patients, for hypothesis generation and for treatment development.

Urgent endoscopic orbital decompression for vision deterioration in dysthyroid optic neuropathy.

AIMS: To report visual acuity outcomes and potential complications in patients undergoing endoscopic transnasal orbital decompression in the setting of acutely deteriorating sight secondary to dysthyroid optic neuropathy (DON) unresponsive to corticosteroid therapy. No previous reports describe vision outcomes in this specific patient population undergoing urgent endoscopic decompression. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective case review at a tertiary-care academic hospital. Four patients with DON were identified that underwent urgent endoscopic orbital decompression for acutely deteriorating vision. Three patients underwent a later decompression of the other orbit, yielding seven decompressions in total for acutely deteriorating vision. Operative technique entailed inferior and medial wall decompressions. The posterior limit of medial wall decompression was within the sphenoid, just anterior to the annulus of Zinn to fully decompress the optic nerve. Primary outcome was visual acuity. RESULTS: In all seven decompressions, visual acuity improved substantially. In 5/7 eyes, preoperative vision was severely impaired at 20/150 or worse. Two eyes had mild and moderate impairment at 20/50 and 20/100. Post-operatively, the moderately and severely impaired eyes improved to 20/60 or better. No complications were encountered. CONCLUSION: Transnasal endoscopic orbital decompression is a safe, effective treatment for acutely worsening visual loss from DON. All cases demonstrated significant objective improvement in visual acuity. Given the need for later contralateral decompression in 3 patients, consideration should be given to performing bilateral orbital decompressions at the time of surgery.

The use of standardized order sets to improve adherence to evidence-based postoperative management in major head and neck surgery.

BACKGROUND: Standardized order sets (SOSs) are clinical tools derived from clinical care pathways that have shown improved patient-recovery and economic benefits. The primary objective was to examine the effect of SOSs on adherence to evidence-based postoperative guidelines for laryngectomy patients. METHODS: A retrospective chart review comparing handwritten and SOS-based postoperative physician orders was conducted for consecutive laryngectomies performed (n=70) within a 3-year time period. Orders were analyzed for errors and deviations from evidence-based guidelines. Secondary outcome included complications such as thromboembolic disease, return to operating room, fistula formation, salivary bypass tube, length of hospital stay and death. RESULTS: Approximately 81% of cases utilizing handwritten orders had at least one error (n=36) compared to 38% in the group that used an SOS (n=34) (P<0.0001). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that errors in mechanical deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (P<0.0001) and antibiotic prophylaxis (P=0.0173) orders were significantly reduced in the SOS group compared to the handwritten group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups for measured postoperative complications (P>0.05) and length of hospital stay (18.6 days in both SOS and handwritten orders groups). CONCLUSIONS: SOSs are associated with reduced errors in postoperative orders. They are important tools to improve adherence to standardized guidelines for surgeries requiring complex postoperative management. Clinical care pathways and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols can use SOSs to ensure appropriate orders are being made.

International survey and consensus (ICON) on ambulatory surgery in rhinology.

OBJECTIVES: Day-case surgery is the gold standard to several surgical procedures in Rhinology. However, few data and guidelines have been published except in the Anglo-Saxon countries and France. The aim of this survey was to propose a list of issues arising during day-case surgery in order to analyze the different constraints encountered around the world. MATERIAL AND METHOD: It was a prospective multicenter international email survey. The method was based on the formalized expert consensus methodology. A list of 11 issues was based on literature data and was sent by e-mail to 265 key opinion leaders (KOL) who attended the IFOS congress. RESULTS: The response rate was 20% from 27 countries without statistical difference between continents concerning the score on each item. The mean age of KOL was 50±10 years. Their mean length of experience was 21±10 years. Issues in relation with technical resources and experience showed that the last time at which ambulatory surgery in the day is possible was 4:00 PM but responses varied depending the availability of technical resources. Bleeding or hematoma occurred most frequently between the third and fourth postoperative day whatever the surgical procedure. A strong agreement and consensus was obtained concerning the nasal packing, septal contention and their schedule of removal which were not a contraindication of day-case. Also 75% of participants were agreeing with a therapeutic education program to improve the performance of postoperative care and decrease readmission rates. A relative agreement without consensus were obtained for the distance between the day-case unit and home, the role of surgery duration and the impact of anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet drugs in overnight admission and readmission rates. CONCLUSION: Practice varies widely owing to local organization constraints and the availability of a dedicated day-case unit seems to be the main limiting factor.

Comparing surgical trays with redundant instruments with trays with reduced instruments: a cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: When prearranged standard surgical trays contain instruments that are repeatedly unused, the redundancy can result in unnecessary health care costs. Our objective was to estimate potential savings by performing an economic evaluation comparing the cost of surgical trays with redundant instruments with surgical trays with reduced instruments ("reduced trays"). METHODS: We performed a cost-analysis from the hospital perspective over a 1-year period. Using a mathematical model, we compared the direct costs of trays containing redundant instruments to reduced trays for 5 otolaryngology procedures. We incorporated data from several sources including local hospital data on surgical volume, the number of instruments on redundant and reduced trays, wages of personnel and time required to pack instruments. From the literature, we incorporated instrument depreciation costs and the time required to decontaminate an instrument. We performed 1-way sensitivity analyses on all variables, including surgical volume. Costs were estimated in 2013 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: The cost of redundant trays was $21 806 and the cost of reduced trays was $8803, for a 1-year cost saving of $13 003. In sensitivity analyses, cost savings ranged from $3262 to $21 395, based on the surgical volume at the institution. Variation in surgical volume resulted in a wider range of estimates, with a minimum of $3253 for low-volume to a maximum of $52 012 for high-volume institutions. INTERPRETATION: Our study suggests moderate savings may be achieved by reducing surgical tray redundancy and, if applied to other surgical specialties, may result in savings to Canadian health care systems.

Squeeze bottle versus saline spray after endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis: a pilot multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for controlled trials to guide the perioperative management of patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). The authors performed a pilot multicenter trial to compare two types of saline delivery devices in this population. METHODS: Patients were randomized to high volume saline irrigation with a squeeze bottle and low volume saline spray after ESS in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Surgeons were blinded to treatment, and one-month postoperative scores for sinonasal outcomes [Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22)] scale, nasal and sinus symptom score (NSS), and perioperative sinus endoscopy (POSE) scale were compared with preoperative scores. RESULTS: Nine centers provided data for 86 patients. All three outcomes measures improved significantly for both groups. Saline spray: SNOT-22 48.8 versus. 23.7, treatment effect 25.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.9-32.2), POSE 21.1 versus. 8.4, treatment effect 12.7 (95% CI, 9.2-16.1), and NSS 8.2 versus 5.0, treatment effect 3.1 (95% CI, 1.4-4.9) pre- and postoperatively, respectively (all p < 0.0001). Squeeze bottle: SNOT-22 49.5 versus 23.6, treatment effect 25.9 (95% CI, 20.3-31.6), POSE 18.6 versus 9.2, treatment effect 9.3, (95% CI 6.7-12.0), and NSS 9.0 versus 5.7, treatment effect 3.3 (95% CI, 2.3-4.3) pre- and postoperatively, respectively (all p < 0.0001). Analysis of variance did not identify a difference between the two treatment groups. Subgroup analysis based on preoperative disease severity did not change the nonassociation of saline bottle with outcome measures. Post hoc sample size calculation determined that 176 patients is required to detect an 8.9-point difference in SNOT-22 scores. CONCLUSION: In this pilot multicenter trial examining patients with chronic rhinosinusitis undergoing ESS, both squeeze bottle and saline spray showed significant improvement in SNOT-22, POSE, and NSS scores at one-month postoperatively. Because the study was nonpowered, we cannot rule out a potential difference between the two treatment groups.