Comparison of prevalence and evolution of COVID-19 olfactory disorders in patients infected by D614 (wild) and B.1.1.7. Alpha variant: a brief report.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence and the evolution of olfactory disorders (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients infected during the first and the second European waves. METHODS: From March 2020 to October 2020, COVID-19 patients with OD were recruited and followed over the 12-month post-infection. The following data were collected: demographic, treatments, vaccination status, and olfactory function. Olfaction was assessed with the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire (ODQ), and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. Outcomes were compared between patients of the first wave (group 1: wild/D614G virus) and the second wave (group 2: B.1.1.7. Alpha variant) at 1-, 3- and 12-month post-infection. RESULTS: Sixty patients completed the evaluations accounting for 33 and 27 patients in group 1 and 2, respectively. The 1-month TDI score (23.7 ± 5.3) was significantly lower in group 2 compared to group 1 (29.8 ± 8.7; p = 0.017). Proportion of normosmic patients at 1-month post-infection was significantly higher in group 1 compared to group 2 (p = 0.009). TDI scores only significantly increased from 1- to 3-month post-infection in anosmic and hyposmic patients. Focusing on There was a negative association between the 1-month ODQ and the 1-month TDI (rs = - 0.493; p = 0.012). ODQ was a significant predictor of TDI scores at 3- and 12-month post-infection. The 12-month prevalence of parosmia was 60.6% in group 1 and 42.4% in group 2, respectively. There was no significant influence of oral corticosteroid treatment, adherence to an olfactory training and vaccination status on the olfactory outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients of the second wave (Alpha B.1.1.7. variant) reported significant higher proportion of psychophysical test abnormalities at 1-month post-infection than patients infected during the first wave (D614G virus).

Platelet-rich plasma injection in the olfactory clefts of COVID-19 patients with long-term olfactory dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection into the olfactory clefts of COVID-19 patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: From March 2022 to July 2022, COVID-19 patients with persistent OD were consecutively recruited to benefit from PRP injection into the olfactory clefts. Patient pain, annoyance, time of procedure, and adverse events were evaluated. Olfactory function was evaluated at baseline and 2-month post-injection with the olfactory disorder questionnaire (ODQ) and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients with anosmia (N = 30), hyposmia (N = 40), or parosmia (N = 17) with a mean OD duration of 15.7 months completed the evaluations. The PRP injection was successfully performed in all patients with a mean procedure time of 18.4 ± 3.4 min. The adverse events included transient epistaxis (N = 31), parosmia related to xylocaine spray (N = 10), and vasovagal episode (N = 2). The injection procedure was evaluated as somewhat or moderately painful by 41 (47%) and 22 (25%) patients, respectively. Thirty-seven patients were assessed after 2 months post-injection. The mean ODQ and TDI scores significantly improved from baseline to 2-month post-injection (p < 0.01). The olfactory improvement occurred after a mean of 3.6 ± 1.9 weeks. CONCLUSION: The injection of PRP into the olfactory clefts is safe and associated with adequate patient-reported outcomes. The findings of this preliminary study suggest possible efficacy on subjective and psychophysical evaluations, but future randomized controlled studies are needed to determine the superiority of PRP injection over placebo.

Validity and reliability of a french version of the olfactory disorders questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a French version of the Olfactory Disorders Questionnaire (Fr-ODQ). METHODS: Patients with olfactory disorder (OD) and controls were enrolled from two medical centers. Individuals completed the Fr-ODQ and the French version of the sinonasal outcome tool-22 (SNOT-22). The extended Sniffin'Sticks procedure was used to test odor Threshold, Discrimination, and Identification (TDI). Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the internal consistency of Fr-ODQ. The reliability and the external validity were evaluated through a test-retest approach and by correlating Fr-ODQ and SNOT-22 scores. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients with OD and 65 healthy individuals completed the evaluations. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.827, reporting adequate internal consistency. The test-retest reliability was high (rs = 0.944, p = 0.001). The external validity was adequate regarding the significant correlation between Fr-ODQ and SNOT-22 (rs = 0.498; p = 0.001). Patients with OD reported a significant higher score of Fr-ODQ than healthy individuals (p < 0.001), indicating a high internal validity. The baseline Fr-ODQ significantly improved after 3-month olfactory training, which corroborated the improvement of TDI scores. CONCLUSION: The Fr-ODQ is the first patient-reported outcome questionnaire validated for French speaking patients. Fr-ODQ is reliable and valid for the evaluation of the olfactory dysfunction and the related impact on quality of life of French-speaking patients.

COVID-19: Post-vaccine Smell and Taste Disorders: Report of 6 Cases.

Post-vaccine olfactory and gustatory disorders are very rare and were reported in patients who received influenza vaccines. In this article, we report 6 cases of post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine olfactory and gustatory disorders in patients with negative nasal swabs. Precisely, olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions were reported in 5 and 1 patients, respectively. Sense disorders occurred after the first injection of AstraZeneca (n = 4) or the second injection of Pfizer (n = 2) vaccines. In 4 cases, the olfactory or gustatory disorder was confirmed with psychophysical evaluations. The duration of chemosensory dysfunction ranged from 4 to 42 days. None of the patient reported mid- or long-term olfactory or gustatory disorder. The occurrence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in adults benefiting from COVID-19 vaccines is still rare but has to be known by otolaryngologists.

Validity and Reliability of the French Short Version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (sQOD-NS).

OBJECTIVE: To develop a French Short Version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (Fr-sQOD) to assess the quality of life impairments of patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: Patients with OD and controls were enrolled from 2 academic centers. Individuals completed the Fr-sQOD, an OD visual analog scale severity, and the French version of the sinonasal outcome tool-22 (SNOT-22). Cronbach α was used to measure the internal consistency of Fr-sQOD. The reliability and the external validity of Fr-sQOD were assessed through a test-retest approach and by correlating Fr-sQOD with SNOT-22 scores, respectively. The external validity was assessed by correlation analysis between Fr-sQOD and the result of an assessment of the severity of OD on a visual analog scale. RESULTS: Eighty patients completed the evaluations. The internal consistency was adequate (Cronbach α .96), and the test-retest reliability was high in the entire cohort (rs = 0.877, P < .001). The correlation between Fr-sQOD total scores and the severity of OD was moderate but significant (rs = -0.431; P = .001) supporting an acceptable external validity. Patients with OD had a significantly higher score of Fr-sQOD than healthy individuals (P < .001), indicating a high internal validity. CONCLUSION: The Fr-sQOD is a reliable and valid self-administered tool in the evaluation of the impact of OD on quality of life of French-speaking patients.

Predictive factors of smell recovery in a clinical series of 288 coronavirus disease 2019 patients with olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim was to evaluate potential predictive factors of smell recovery in a clinical series of 288 patients presenting olfactory dysfunction (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Potential correlations were sought between epidemiological, clinical and immunological characteristics of patients and the persistence of OD at 60 days. METHODS: COVID-19 positive patients presenting OD were prospectively recruited from three European hospitals. Baseline clinical and olfactory evaluations were performed within the first 2 weeks after OD onset and repeated at 30 and 60 days. In a subgroup of patients, anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies were measured in serum, saliva and nasal secretions at 60 days. RESULTS: A total of 288 COVID-19 patients with OD were included in the study. Two weeks after the onset of the loss of smell, 52.4% of patients had OD on psychophysical tests, including 113 cases (39.2%) of anosmia and 38 cases (13.2%) of hyposmia. At 60-day follow-up, 25.4% of the patients presented persistent OD. There was no significant correlation between sex, age, viral load on nasopharyngeal swab or COVID-19 severity and poor olfactory outcome. In a subgroup of 63 patients, it was demonstrated that patients with poor olfactory outcomes at 60 days had lower levels of salivary and nasal immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgG1, but similar levels of antibodies in the serum. CONCLUSIONS: No clinical markers predicted the evolution of OD at 60 days. Patients with poor olfactory outcome at 60 days had lower saliva and nasal antibodies, suggesting a role for local immune responses in the persistence of COVID-19 related OD.

COVID-19: Recovery from Chemosensory Dysfunction. A Multicentre study on Smell and Taste.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: With the COVID-19 pandemic, chemosensory dysfunction are among the most prevalent symptoms. Most reports are subjective evaluations, which have been suggested to be unreliable. The objective is to test chemosensory dysfunction and recovery based on extensive psychophysical tests in COVID-19 during the course of the disease. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: A total of 111 patients from four centers participated in the study. All tested positive for SARS-COV-2 with RT-PCR. They were tested within 3 days of diagnosis and 28 to 169 days after infection. Testing included extensive olfactory testing with the Sniffin' Sticks test for threshold, discrimination and identification abilities, and with the Taste Sprays and Taste Strips for gustatory function for quasi-threshold and taste identification abilities. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in olfactory function during and after infection. During infection 21% were anosmic, 49% hyposmic, and 30% normosmic. After infection only 1% were anosmic, 26% hyposmic, and 73% normosmic. For gustatory function, there was a difference for all taste qualities, but significantly in sour, bitter, and total score. Twenty-six percent had gustatory dysfunction during infection and 6.5% had gustatory dysfunction after infection. Combining all tests 22% had combined olfactory and gustatory dysfunction during infection. After infection no patients had combined dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Chemosensory dysfunction is very common in COVID-19, either as isolated smell or taste dysfunction or a combined dysfunction. Most people regain their chemosensory function within the first 28 days, but a quarter of the patients show persisting dysfunction, which should be referred to specialist smell and taste clinics for rehabilitation of chemosensory function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:1095-1100, 2021.

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions as a clinical presentation of mild-to-moderate forms of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a multicenter European study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the occurrence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection were recruited from 12 European hospitals. The following epidemiological and clinical outcomes have been studied: age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities, and general and otolaryngological symptoms. Patients completed olfactory and gustatory questionnaires based on the smell and taste component of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and the short version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (sQOD-NS). RESULTS: A total of 417 mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients completed the study (263 females). The most prevalent general symptoms consisted of cough, myalgia, and loss of appetite. Face pain and nasal obstruction were the most disease-related otolaryngological symptoms. 85.6% and 88.0% of patients reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions, respectively. There was a significant association between both disorders (p < 0.001). Olfactory dysfunction (OD) appeared before the other symptoms in 11.8% of cases. The sQO-NS scores were significantly lower in patients with anosmia compared with normosmic or hyposmic individuals (p = 0.001). Among the 18.2% of patients without nasal obstruction or rhinorrhea, 79.7% were hyposmic or anosmic. The early olfactory recovery rate was 44.0%. Females were significantly more affected by olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions than males (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Olfactory and gustatory disorders are prevalent symptoms in European COVID-19 patients, who may not have nasal symptoms. The sudden anosmia or ageusia need to be recognized by the international scientific community as important symptoms of the COVID-19 infection.

Association between laryngopharyngeal reflux and benign vocal folds lesions: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the role of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in the development of benign lesions of the vocal folds (BLVF). METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched by three independent investigators for articles published between January 1990 and November 2018 providing substantial information about the role of LPR in the development of nodules, polyps, cysts, Reinke's edema, and sulcus vocalis. Inclusion, exclusion, diagnostic criteria and clinical outcome evaluation of included studies were analyzed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. RESULTS: Of the 155 relevant publications, 42 studies were included. Thirty-five were clinical studies and seven were experimental research studying the impact of reflux on vocal fold tissue. Only seven clinical studies utilized objective LPR diagnoses (pH monitoring), suggesting an association between LPR and the development of nodules, polyps, and Reinke's edema. These studies were characterized by a substantial heterogeneity due to discrepancies in inclusion/exclusion criteria, diagnostic methods, and clinical outcome evaluation. The few basic science studies on this topic support that LPR creates an environment that may predispose to BLVF through changes in defense mechanisms of the vocal folds, cell-to-cell dehiscence, inflammatory reaction of the vocal folds, and reaction to phonotrauma. CONCLUSIONS: Caustic mucosal injury from LPR could cause increased susceptibility of the vocal fold mucosa to injury and subsequent formation of nodules, polyps, or Reinke's edema. However, the heterogeneity and the low number of high-quality studies limit the ability to draw definitive conclusions. Future clinical and experimental studies are needed to better identify the role of reflux in development of BLVF. Laryngoscope, 129:E329-E341, 2019.