Remote psychophysical evaluation of olfactory and gustatory functions in early-stage coronavirus disease 2019 patients: the Bologna experience of 300 cases.

BACKGROUND: An objective evaluation of coronavirus disease 2019 in the first days of infection is almost impossible, as affected individuals are generally in home quarantine, and there is limited accessibility for the operator who should perform the test. To overcome this limitation, a recently validated psychophysical self-administered test was used, which can be performed remotely in the assessment of early-stage coronavirus disease 2019 patients. METHODS: Olfactory and gustatory functions were objectively assessed in 300 patients in the first 7 days from coronavirus disease 2019 symptom onset. RESULTS: Seventy per cent of the patients presented olfactory and/or gustatory disorders. The dysfunctions detected were mainly complete anosmia (47 per cent) or ageusia (38 per cent). A significant correlation was found between taste dysfunction and female gender (odds ratio = 1.936, p = 0.014) and fever (odds ratio = 2.132, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The psychophysical evaluation protocol proposed is an effective tool for the fast and objective evaluation of patients in the early stages of coronavirus disease 2019. Chemosensitive disorders have been confirmed to be frequent and early symptoms of the coronavirus infection, and, in a significant number of cases, they are the first or only manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019.

A multicenter trial of specific local nasal immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of specific local nasal immunotherapy (LNIT) in powder form in patients with allergic rhinitis, using subjective and objective parameters. STUDY DESIGN: A double-blind randomized multicenter trial of 102 patients with allergic rhinitis who were treated with specific LNIT for 8 consecutive months. METHODS: After identifying allergens with the skin prick test and sensitization threshold dose with the specific nasal provocation test, 102 patients were selected, of whom 55 were allergic to mites and 47 were allergic to Graminaceae or Parietaria pollen. The specific treatments were self-administered using an insufflator in two phases (phase 1: increasing doses; phase: 2, maintenance dose). Patients were evaluated before and after 32 weeks of treatment by subjective analysis of their self-reported symptoms and by objective analysis of nasal provocation test, nasal resistance by anterior rhinomanometry, and mucociliary clearance time. RESULTS: Clinical efficacy of LNIT for allergy to mites and pollens was confirmed by the differences in the symptoms score between the active group and the placebo group. The nasal provocation test results confirmed that this difference was statistically significant. The rhinomanometric analysis gave positive results for the treated group mainly in LNIT for mites. No differences in mucociliary clearance time were found. CONCLUSIONS: Specific LNIT is effective for allergic rhinitis and appears to offer considerable advantages over other hyposensitization methods. It can be done at home, patient compliance is good, and the treatment is safe.

Specific nasal provocation test with powder allergen.

Reported here are the results of a large-scale trial conducted under the guidance of Prof. Giovanni Motta, which I coordinated. A total of 656 patients with nasal hyperreactivity were recruited in 51 Italian centres (18 in the north of Italy, 20 in central Italy and 13 in the south). The trial's results were as follows. 1) A clear clinical prevalence of sensitization to different allergens in the different areas of Italy, which could be roughly classified thus: a) in Northern Italy birch and grasses were in the main species; b) in Central Italy mites prevailed but oleaceae were also significant; c) in Southern Italy parietaria and oleaceae were the prevailing species. 2) Most cases were sensitive to several allergens, although a considerable proportion (22%) actually presented reactions only to one allergen and those responding account of the patients sensitive to only one allergen and those responding to a main allergen, the proportion of patients reacting clinically to only one allergen rises to 64%. 4) The specific nasal provocation test (sNPT) offers specificity comparable to in vivo diagnostic methods such as the prick test, and in vitro methods such as RAST, but is much more sensitive. 5) The sNPT can be done in any season. 6) The sNPT is highly specific below a threshold value of nasal reactivity, which can be identified for each allergen studied and expressed in Allergenic Units. 7) In patients in whom the prick test shows multiple sensitivity, the specific NPT identifies the allergen presumably responsible for the nasal reactions (main allergen). In the light of these findings double-blind specific immunotherapy was started, to last 1 year, in 107 patients (49 given placebo and 58 active treatment), with nasal allergy to grasses, parietaria and mites. The results of this treatment were as follows: 74.1% of patients presented a reduction in nasal resistance, measured by dynamic anterior rhinomanometry, indicating relief of nasal obstruction; mucociliary transport time became normal in 81% of patients, meaning that rhinorrhoea had become less marked; there was significant rise in the nasal reactivity threshold in 74.1% of patients, illustrating the degree of desensitization achieved; nasal IgA increased by 62.5% of patients and IgG in 55.2% indicating improvement in the local immunological picture. No such improvements were detectable in the patients given placebo. In conclusion, therefore, the findings of this trial in allergic rhinitis underline that the specific NPT proved more sensitive than other in vivo and in vitro diagnostic methods and is unquestionably a fundamental investigational approach for assessing nasal allergies, identifying the allergens causing the symptoms and setting up rational local immunotherapy. The sNPT also showed the efficacy of specific intranasal immunotherapy.