Use of platelet-rich plasma for COVID-19-related olfactory loss: a randomized controlled trial.

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.

Development of parallel forms of a brief smell identification test useful for longitudinal testing.

Although there are numerous brief odor identification tests available for quantifying the ability to smell, none are available in multiple parallel forms that can be longitudinally administered without potential confounding from knowledge of prior test items. Moreover, empirical algorithms for establishing optimal test lengths have not been generally applied. In this study, we employed and compared eight machine learning algorithms to develop a set of four brief parallel smell tests employing items from the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test that optimally differentiated 100 COVID-19 patients from 132 healthy controls. Among the algorithms, linear discriminant analysis (LDA) achieved the best overall performance. The minimum number of odorant test items needed to differentiate smell loss accurately was identified as eight. We validated the sensitivity of the four developed tests, whose means and variances did not differ from one another (Bradley-Blackwood test), by sequential testing an independent group of 32 subjects that included persons with smell dysfunction not due to COVID-19. These eight-item tests clearly differentiated the olfactory compromised subjects from normosmics, with areas under the ROC curve ranging from 0.79 to 0.83. Each test was correlated with the overall UPSIT scores from which they were derived. These brief smell tests can be used separately or sequentially over multiple days in a variety of contexts where longitudinal olfactory testing is needed.

Persistent post-COVID-19 smell loss is associated with immune cell infiltration and altered gene expression in olfactory epithelium.

SARS-CoV-2 causes profound changes in the sense of smell, including total smell loss. Although these alterations are often transient, many patients with COVID-19 exhibit olfactory dysfunction that lasts months to years. Although animal and human autopsy studies have suggested mechanisms driving acute anosmia, it remains unclear how SARS-CoV-2 causes persistent smell loss in a subset of patients. To address this question, we analyzed olfactory epithelial samples collected from 24 biopsies, including from nine patients with objectively quantified long-term smell loss after COVID-19. This biopsy-based approach revealed a diffuse infiltrate of T cells expressing interferon-γ and a shift in myeloid cell population composition, including enrichment of CD207+ dendritic cells and depletion of anti-inflammatory M2 macrophages. Despite the absence of detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA or protein, gene expression in the barrier supporting cells of the olfactory epithelium, termed sustentacular cells, appeared to reflect a response to ongoing inflammatory signaling, which was accompanied by a reduction in the number of olfactory sensory neurons relative to olfactory epithelial sustentacular cells. These findings indicate that T cell-mediated inflammation persists in the olfactory epithelium long after SARS-CoV-2 has been eliminated from the tissue, suggesting a mechanism for long-term post-COVID-19 smell loss.

Impact of COVID‐19 versus chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis associated olfactory dysfunction on health utility and quality of life

Background Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is associated with both post‐viral and inflammatory etiologies such as COVID‐19 and chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis (CRS/R) respectively, to result in reduced quality of life (QoL). However, the former typically induces a sudden‐onset OD while the latter has a gradual presentation. This study aims to establish and compare health utility values (HUVs) and olfactory‐specific QoL measurements between patients with COVID‐19 and CRS/R related OD. Methods This prospective study surveyed COVID‐19 and CRS/R patients with self‐reported OD using HUV assessments (EuroQol‐visual analog scale [EQ‐VAS], EuroQol‐5 dimension [EQ‐5D], time trade‐off [TTO]) and olfactory and sinonasal QoL measures (questionnaire of olfactory disorders –negative and positive statements [QOD‐NS + PS] and sino‐nasal outcome test [SNOT‐22]). A subgroup of subjects completed objective olfactory testing. Intergroup mean scores were compared using Mann–Whitney U tests. Results One hundred eleven subjects were enrolled: mean age ± SD (43.0 ± 15.4 years), 55.9% female. CRS/R was associated with lower HUVs as measured by EQ‐VAS (CRS/R: 0.67 ± 0.18 vs. COVID‐19: 0.74 ± 0.19, p = .03) and worse SNOT‐22 scores in both overall (CRS/R: 49.03 ± 21.04 vs. COVID‐19: 27.58 ± 18.45, p < .001) and subgroup analysis of objectively confirmed OD subjects (CRS/R: 52.40 ± 22.78 vs. COVID‐19: 29.84 ± 21.10, p = .01). On the other hand, COVID‐19 has greater burden on olfactory‐specific QoL (QOD‐NS + PS, COVID‐19: 23.19 ± 13.73 vs. CRS/R: 17.25 ± 11.38, p = .04). Both groups demonstrated a similar decrease in health using the EQ‐5D assessment. Conclusion CRS/R associated OD has a more severe impact on general health and sinonasal specific QoL outcomes, while COVID‐19 associated OD has a greater burden on olfactory‐specific QoL. Level of evidence Level 2c. This work compared multiple quality of life instruments associated with olfactory dysfunction in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis and COVID‐19. Utilizing health utility and olfactory‐specific quality of life measurements, our findings showed that chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis induced olfactory dysfunction had a more severe impact on general health utility and sinonasal specific quality of life outcomes, while COVID‐19 induced olfactory dysfunction had a greater burden on olfactory‐specific quality of life.

Impact of COVID-19 versus chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis associated olfactory dysfunction on health utility and quality of life.

Background: Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is associated with both post-viral and inflammatory etiologies such as COVID-19 and chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis (CRS/R) respectively, to result in reduced quality of life (QoL). However, the former typically induces a sudden-onset OD while the latter has a gradual presentation. This study aims to establish and compare health utility values (HUVs) and olfactory-specific QoL measurements between patients with COVID-19 and CRS/R related OD. Methods: This prospective study surveyed COVID-19 and CRS/R patients with self-reported OD using HUV assessments (EuroQol-visual analog scale [EQ-VAS], EuroQol-5 dimension [EQ-5D], time trade-off [TTO]) and olfactory and sinonasal QoL measures (questionnaire of olfactory disorders -negative and positive statements [QOD-NS + PS] and sino-nasal outcome test [SNOT-22]). A subgroup of subjects completed objective olfactory testing. Intergroup mean scores were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: One hundred eleven subjects were enrolled: mean age ± SD (43.0 ± 15.4 years), 55.9% female. CRS/R was associated with lower HUVs as measured by EQ-VAS (CRS/R: 0.67 ± 0.18 vs. COVID-19: 0.74 ± 0.19, p = .03) and worse SNOT-22 scores in both overall (CRS/R: 49.03 ± 21.04 vs. COVID-19: 27.58 ± 18.45, p < .001) and subgroup analysis of objectively confirmed OD subjects (CRS/R: 52.40 ± 22.78 vs. COVID-19: 29.84 ± 21.10, p = .01). On the other hand, COVID-19 has greater burden on olfactory-specific QoL (QOD-NS + PS, COVID-19: 23.19 ± 13.73 vs. CRS/R: 17.25 ± 11.38, p = .04). Both groups demonstrated a similar decrease in health using the EQ-5D assessment. Conclusion: CRS/R associated OD has a more severe impact on general health and sinonasal specific QoL outcomes, while COVID-19 associated OD has a greater burden on olfactory-specific QoL. Level of evidence: Level 2c.

Clinical factors associated with lower health scores in COVID-19-related persistent olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Patients with persistent COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction (OD) commonly report parosmia. Understanding the impact of COVID-19 OD and parosmia is critical to prioritizing research and interventions. In this study we investigate the impact of parosmia and other clinical and disease characteristics on health state utility values (HUVs) for those with persistent COVID-19 OD. METHODS: Patients with a history of COVID-19 diagnosis and persistent OD were recruited from a tertiary medical center and a social media support forum for chemosensory dysfunction. Clinical characteristics and disease-specific symptoms were obtained along with self-reported history of smell function and presence of parosmia. HUVs were calculated using indirect (EuroQol 5-Dimension [EQ-5D]) and direct (VAS) measures. RESULTS: Our study included 286 subjects (75.52% women) with persistent COVID-19-related OD. Results (mean ± standard deviation) of HUVs based on EQ-5D and VAS were 0.81 ± 0.14 and 0.73 ± 0.21, respectively. Mean self-reported smell function (on a 0-10 scale) was 9.67 ± 1.25 pre-COVID-19, 0.93 ± 2.34 at diagnosis, and 3.39 ± 2.32 at most current assessment. A total of 89.16% of the subjects reported parosmia and 24.13% sought medical care for anosmia. Seeing an MD for OD (p < 0.001), female gender (EQ-5D only, p = 0.002), a history of chronic pain (p < 0.05) and depression/anxiety (EQ-5D only, p < 0.001) predicted worse health. Parosmia and persistent symptoms, such as shortness of breath, were associated with lower EQ-5D and VAS scores, but did not independently predict poorer health scores on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Persistent COVID-19 OD results in health states comparable to other chronic diseases.

Determinants of SARS-CoV-2 entry and replication in airway mucosal tissue and susceptibility in smokers.

Understanding viral tropism is an essential step toward reducing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, decreasing mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and limiting opportunities for mutant strains to arise. Currently, little is known about the extent to which distinct tissue sites in the human head and neck region and proximal respiratory tract selectively permit SARS-CoV-2 infection and replication. In this translational study, we discover key variabilities in expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2), essential SARS-CoV-2 entry factors, among the mucosal tissues of the human proximal airways. We show that SARS-CoV-2 infection is present in all examined head and neck tissues, with a notable tropism for the nasal cavity and tracheal mucosa. Finally, we uncover an association between smoking and higher SARS-CoV-2 viral infection in the human proximal airway, which may explain the increased susceptibility of smokers to developing severe COVID-19. This is at least partially explained by differences in interferon (IFN)-ß1 levels between smokers and non-smokers.

Immunohistochemical and qPCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the Human Middle Ear Versus the Nasal Cavity: Case Series.

Viral infections have already been implicated with otitis media and sudden sensorineural hearing loss. However, the pathophysiology of COVID-19 as it relates to otologic disorders is not well-defined. With the spread of SARS-CoV-2, it is important to evaluate its colonization of middle ear mucosa. Middle ear and nasal tissue samples for quantitative RT-PCR and histologic evaluations were obtained from post-mortem COVID-19 patients and non-diseased control patients. Here we present evidence that SARS-CoV-2 colonizes the middle ear epithelium and co-localizes with the primary viral receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Both middle ear and nasal epithelial cells show relatively high expression of ACE2, required for SARS-CoV-2 entry. The epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) was use as a biomarker of epithelia. Furthermore, we found that the viral load in the middle ear is lower than that present in the nasal cavity.

Assessment of patient recognition of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated olfactory loss and recovery: a longitudinal study.

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.

ACE2 localizes to the respiratory cilia and is not increased by ACE inhibitors or ARBs.

The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of the ongoing severe acute respiratory disease pandemic COVID-19. Tissue and cellular tropism is one key to understanding the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2. We investigate the expression and subcellular localization of the SARS-CoV-2 receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), within the upper (nasal) and lower (pulmonary) respiratory tracts of human donors using a diverse panel of banked tissues. Here, we report our discovery that the ACE2 receptor protein robustly localizes within the motile cilia of airway epithelial cells, which likely represents the initial or early subcellular site of SARS-CoV-2 viral entry during host respiratory transmission. We further determine whether ciliary ACE2 expression in the upper airway is influenced by patient demographics, clinical characteristics, comorbidities, or medication use, and show the first mechanistic evidence that the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) does not increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection through enhancing the expression of ciliary ACE2 receptor. These findings are crucial to our understanding of the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 for prevention and control of this virulent pathogen.

Coronavirus Disease-19 and Rhinology/Facial Plastics.

This review summarizes the challenges and adaptations that have taken place in rhinology and facial plastics in response to the ongoing coronavirus disease-19 pandemic. In particular, the prolonged exposure and manipulation of the nasal and oral cavities portend a high risk of viral transmission. We discuss evidence-based recommendations to mitigate the risk of viral transmission through novel techniques and device implementation as well as increasing conservative management of certain pathologies.

Association of subjective olfactory dysfunction and 12-item odor identification testing in ambulatory COVID-19 patients.

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.

Persistent Smell Loss Following Undetectable SARS-CoV-2.

The association of smell and taste loss with COVID-19 has been well demonstrated with high prevalence rates. In certain cases, chemosensory loss may be the only symptom of COVID-19 and may linger while other symptoms have resolved. The significance of persistent smell and taste loss and its relationship to ongoing viral shedding has yet to be investigated. In this cross-sectional study, of the 316 laboratory test-confirmed COVID-19 cases at our institution, 46 had subsequent test-based confirmation of viral clearance with 2 consecutive negative RT-PCR test results (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction). Olfactory dysfunction was reported by 50% of the patients (23 of 46), with 78% (18 of 23) having subjective persistent smell loss despite negative RT-PCR test results. These preliminary data demonstrate the persistence of self-reported smell loss despite otherwise clinical resolution and undetectable nasal viral RNA.