Riechstörungen

Postinfectious conditions challenge disease-specificity of SNOT-22

PURPOSE

The Sino-Nasal-Outcome-Test 22 (SNOT-22) questionnaire assesses treatment outcome and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). However, given the overlap between CRS and olfaction in terms of nasal function and the definition of CRS, a fundamental question arises: can patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD) stemming from other causes attain SNOT-22 scores similar to those seen in CRS, even in the absence of CRS? Our study aimed to explore whether OD arising from various postinfectious mechanisms challenges the disease-specificity of SNOT-22 for CRS. If so, could focus on scores within specific symptom domains of SNOT-22 prove valuable in distinguishing between different etiologies.

METHODS

The study adopted an observational, retrospective cohort design based on prospectively registered patients and related variables using the REDCap platform. 460 patients experiencing OD due to either (1) simple or (2) complex post-COVID-19, (3) postinfectious non-COVID-19, and (4) CRS, were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

The study revealed that the total SNOT-22 score lacks disease-specificity for CRS. This is evident, because complex postinfectious mechanisms resulting from COVID-19 can produce similar symptoms in patients. Notably, elevated total scores were primarily driven by high subdomain scores within the "sleep and cognition" domain.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of SNOT-22 as a screening tool needs to be approached with caution, as the total score alone does not provide disease-specific insights. A more thorough exploration of the four symptom domains and the identification of distinctive scoring patterns within the clinical context may prove pivotal in effectively differentiating between various underlying causes.

Alcohol Sniff Test (AST): An Important Tool for Screening Post-Viral Olfactory Loss in Acute Flu-Like Dysfunction

Olfactory disorders have a significant impact on patients' quality of life but are often underestimated in clinical practice. Upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) are a common cause of olfactory loss. While most cases of olfactory loss due to URTIs are conductive and reversible, post-viral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD) persists despite symptom improvement. PVOD is attributed to damage to the olfactory epithelium and nerves or central olfactory pathway lesions. The Alcohol Sniff Test (AST) has been proposed as a tool to assess olfactory function in the acute phase and aid in differentiating PVOD from conductive disorders. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the AST as a predictor of post-viral olfactory loss in patients with flu-like syndrome. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted among employees with flu-like syndrome at a tertiary hospital. Three groups were formed: flu-like syndrome with conductive disorder without COVID-19 (PVOD-), flu-like syndrome with neurosensory and/or central disorder due to COVID-19 (PVOD +), and an asymptomatic control group. The Alcohol Sniff Test was performed to assess olfactory function. Statistical analysis was conducted to evaluate the AST's performance. For a cut off of 10 cm, 88.57% of PVOD + patients and 60.53% of PVOD - patients showed AST alteration, respectively (p = 0.013, OR = 5.05, 95% CI [1.48-17.25]). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean distance between the PVOD + group (4.35 ± 4.1 cm) and the control group (20 ± 4.33 cm) (p < 0.05). This relationship was also observed between the PVOD + and PVOD- groups (9 cm ± 7.5) (p < 0.05) and between the PVOD- and control groups (p < 0.05). For a cut off of 10 cm, the AST showed a sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 41%, resulting in an Odds Ratio of 9.7 (95% CI 3.3-28.1) (p < 0.001) and a Positive Predictive Value of 69.4% for PVOD. PVOD, including cases associated with COVID-19, is a prevalent cause of olfactory loss. The Alcohol Sniff Test demonstrated promising results in identifying PVOD in patients with flu-like syndrome. The test's simplicity and accessibility make it a valuable tool for early screening and identifying individuals who may benefit from prompt treatment. The Alcohol Sniff Test (AST) shows potential as an effective tool for screening post-viral olfactory loss in patients with flu-like syndrome. It can aid in early identification of PVOD cases and facilitate timely interventions to reduce the likelihood of persistent hyposmia.

[Features of olfactory impairment connected with trigeminal nerve system]

Data on the state of sense of smell in patients who had a new coronavirus infection caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus are currently reduced because of the impairment of the olfactory nerve system. There are practically no results in studies of disorders in the trigeminal nerve system.

OBJECTIVE

Qualitative assessment of olfactory disorders after COVID-19 according to the system of olfactory and trigeminal nerves with a targeted assessment of the functional component of olfactory disorders.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We examined 40 patients aged 19 to 66 who had a coronavirus infection. All patients underwent neurological, otorhinolaryngological examinations, olfactometry, filled out the hospital anxiety and depression scale.

RESULTS

Anosmia was diagnosed in 5 (12.5%) patients, hyposmia in 21 (52.5%) patients, and normosmia in 14 (35%) patients. Formed: the 1st group - 14 patients (35%) with normogram according to olfactometry; the 2nd group - 26 patients (65%) with anosmia/hyposmia. In the 1st group, disorders of the anxiety-depressive spectrum were significantly more common. In the 2nd group, a low identification of odors was found, lying in the spectrum of fresh, sharp, unpleasant, irritating, compared with sweet and pleasant or neutral, which indicates a predominant lesion of the trigeminal system.

CONCLUSION

In patients with complaints of impaired sense of smell after undergoing COVID-19, the possible functional nature of anosmia/hyposmia should be taken into account, which requires the referral of such patients to psychotherapeutic specialists, and the possible entry of olfactory disorders into the 'trigeminal' spectrum.

Diagnosed and subjectively perceived long-term effects of COVID-19 infection on olfactory function assessed by supervised machine learning

Loss of olfactory function is a typical acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptom, at least in early variants of SARS-CoV2. The time that has elapsed since the emergence of COVID-19 now allows for assessing the long-term prognosis of its olfactory impact. Participants (n = 722) of whom n = 464 reported having had COVID-19 dating back with a mode of 174 days were approached in a museum as a relatively unbiased environment. Olfactory function was diagnosed by assessing odor threshold and odor identification performance. Subjects also rated their actual olfactory function on an 11-point numerical scale [0,…10]. Neither the frequency of olfactory diagnostic categories nor olfactory test scores showed any COVID-19-related effects. Olfactory diagnostic categories (anosmia, hyposmia, or normosmia) were similarly distributed among former patients and controls (0.86%, 18.97%, and 80.17% for former patients and 1.17%, 17.51%, and 81.32% for controls). Former COVID-19 patients, however, showed differences in their subjective perception of their own olfactory function. The impact of this effect was substantial enough that supervised machine learning algorithms detected past COVID-19 infections in new subjects, based on reduced self-awareness of olfactory performance and parosmia, while the diagnosed olfactory function did not contribute any relevant information in this context. Based on diagnosed olfactory function, results suggest a positive prognosis for COVID-19-related olfactory loss in the long term. Traces of former infection are found in self-perceptions of olfaction, highlighting the importance of investigating the long-term effects of COVID-19 using reliable and validated diagnostic measures in olfactory testing.

A double-blinded randomised controlled trial of vitamin A drops to treat post-viral olfactory loss: study protocol for a proof-of-concept study for vitamin A nasal drops in post-viral olfactory loss (APOLLO)

BACKGROUND

Smell loss is a common problem with an estimated 5% of the population having no functioning sense of smell. Viral causes of smell loss are the second most common cause and the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is estimated to have caused 20,000 more people this year to have a lasting loss of smell. Isolation, depression, anxiety, and risk of danger from hazards such as toxic gas and spoiled food are all negative impacts. It also affects appetite with weight loss/gain in two-thirds of those affected. Phantosmia or smell distortion can also occur making most foods seem unpalatable. Smell training has been tried with good results in the immediate post-viral phase. Evidence behind treatment with steroids has not shown to have proven effectiveness. With this, a key problem for patients and their clinicians is the lack of proven effective therapeutic treatment options. Based on previous studies, there is some evidence supporting the regenerative potential of retinoic acid, the metabolically active form of vitamin A in the regeneration of olfactory receptor neurons. It is based on this concept that we have chosen vitamin A as our study comparator.

AIM

To undertake a two-arm randomised trial of intranasally delivered vitamin A vs no intervention to determine proof of concept.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study will compare 10,000 IU once daily Vitamin A self-administered intranasal drops versus peanut oil drops (placebo) delivered over 12 weeks in patients with post-viral olfactory loss. Potentially eligible patients will be recruited from the Smell & Taste Clinic and via the charity Fifth Sense. They will be invited to attend the Brain Imaging Centre at the University of East Anglia on two occasions, 3 months apart. If they meet the eligibility criteria, they will be consented to enter the study and randomised to receive vitamin A drops or no treatment in a 2:1 ratio. MRI scanning will enable volumetric measurement of the OB and ROS; fMRI will then be conducted using an olfactometer to deliver pulsed odours-phenethylalcohol (rose-like) and hydrogen sulphide (rotten eggs). Participants will also perform a standard smell test at both visits as well as complete a quality-of-life questionnaire. Change in OB volume will be the primary outcome measure.

DISCUSSION

We expect the outputs of this study to enable a subsequent randomised controlled trial of Vitamin A versus placebo. With PPI input we will make the outputs publicly available using journals, conferences, and social media via Fifth Sense. We have already prepared a draft RCT proposal in partnership with the Norwich Clinical Trials Unit and plan to develop this further in light of the findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry 39523. Date of registration in the primary registry: 23rd February 2021.

Characteristics of smell and taste disorders depending on etiology: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

This study investigates the impact of etiology on the epidemiologic profile, disease severity, type of treatment and therapy outcome in smell and taste disorders.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of 270 patients that presented with a smell or taste disorder in a specialized, tertiary care center. An established questionnaire was used to collect data from patients and physicians. Olfactometry was performed with the Sniffin' Sticks test kit, while gustometry was performed by taste strips.

RESULTS

Post-traumatic etiology was associated with young age (median 46 years) and male sex, and showed the most severe degrees of smell loss compared to other etiologies (64.3% anosmia). Postinfectious causes occurred more frequently in females (77.3%) and correlated with a history of pharyngeal surgery, suggesting a vulnerability for virally mediated sensory dysfunction following adenoid/tonsil removal. Parosmia also correlated with both postinfectious etiology (62.5%) and female sex. In sinunasal etiology, the presence of nasal polyps worsened the overall olfactory test score by approximately 50%. In particular, smell threshold and discrimination were reduced, while smell identification was not significantly impacted by nasal polyp obstruction. Sinunasal dysfunction was the only etiology to show significant improvement after therapy (73.9% improved). Finally, we could establish good correlations between the subjective impairment and objective dysfunction for each sensory modality.

CONCLUSION

Each etiology of chemosensory dysfunction shows particular distributions of variables like sex, age, comorbidities and operations, disease severity, sensory threshold, discrimination and identification. This paper offers a detailed account of the correlations between the cause and the characteristics of smell and taste loss.

Olfactory Function and Olfactory Disorders

The sense of smell is important. This became especially clear to patients with infection-related olfactory loss during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We react, for example, to the body odors of other humans. The sense of smell warns us of danger, and it allows us to perceive flavors when eating and drinking. In essence, this means quality of life. Therefore, anosmia must be taken seriously. Although olfactory receptor neurons are characterized by regenerative capacity, anosmia is relatively common with about 5 % of anosmic people in the general population. Olfactory disorders are classified according to their causes (e. g., infections of the upper respiratory tract, traumatic brain injury, chronic rhinosinusitis, age) with the resulting different therapeutic options and prognoses. Thorough history taking is therefore important. A wide variety of tools are available for diagnosis, ranging from short screening tests and detailed multidimensional test procedures to electrophysiological and imaging methods. Thus, quantitative olfactory disorders are easily assessable and traceable. For qualitative olfactory disorders such as parosmia, however, no objectifying diagnostic procedures are currently available. Therapeutic options for olfactory disorders are limited. Nevertheless, there are effective options consisting of olfactory training as well as various additive drug therapies. The consultation and the competent discussion with the patients are of major importance.

Olfactory Disorders Questionnaire: Scaling severity of quality-of-life impact

BACKGROUND

The Olfactory Disorders Questionnaire (ODQ) is widely used for patients suffering from olfactory disorders to depict the impact on quality of life. The aim of this study was to scale and produce reference values for patients ODQ score according to Becks Depression Inventory (BDI) severity.

METHODS

In this prospective study, a cross-sectional anonymous survey was created, which combined EQ-5D-5L, BDI and ODQ. Correlation was calculated between the three questionnaires. Receiver operator characteristic curves were created to produce cut-off values for ODQ scores based on three BDI categories (mild, borderline clinical and moderate-to-severe depression).

RESULTS

Of the 578 who responded to the survey, 445 completed all sections and were included in the study. Majority were female (n = 327,73.5%), median age group 55-70 years (n = 193,43.4%). There was a strong correlation between BDI score and total ODQ score. There was a clear gradient in total ODQ score for each BDI classification; those with mild depression had the lowest mean ODQ score (101.8, range 39-168), those with moderate-to-severe depression had the highest (138.24, range 74-177). Due to overlapping of confidence intervals we were unable to grade the ODQ score.

CONCLUSION

The study was unable to generate reference values for the ODQ due to lower numbers of patients with borderline clinical to extreme depression. However, we were able to appreciate the general trend, that the higher the ODQ score, the higher the risk of depression. These findings should guide clinical practice to ensure appropriate care and support is provided for those with olfactory dysfunction.

Establishing UK research priorities in smell and taste disorders: A James Lind alliance priority setting partnership

OBJECTIVES

To determine the top 10 research priorities in Smell and Taste Disorders (SATD).

DESIGN

After steering group was established, an electronic survey was disseminated to determine the list of questions. After removing out-of-scope responses, the remainder were consolidated to create summary questions. A literature search was conducted to remove already answered questions. A second survey was used to determine the top questions that formed the subject of final debate at a workshop attended by clinicians and patients to determine the top 10 priorities.

SETTING

A James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership (JLAPSP) was established by FifthSense to identify the top 10 research questions in SATDs in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANT

All stakeholders in SATDs (patients, healthcare professionals, family, carers, researchers).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Final 10 research priorities.

RESULTS

The 665 respondents to the initial survey provided 1698 research questions. Thirteen were out-of-scope and removed; remaining 1685 were then consolidated to form 147 summary questions. Following literature search and discussion with the steering group, 37 questions remained for the second survey, which 235 people responded. The top ten priorities agreed upon in the workshop covered themes of improved understanding of pathophysiologlogy, improving health services, and managing long-term effects of smell/taste disorders. The most important research question agreed was "How can we further our understanding of the mechanism of disease in the nerve pathways that affect smell and taste disorders, including where parosmia and phantosmia exist."

CONCLUSION

We report the top 10 research priorities in smell and taste disorders. These priorities will now empower researchers to secure research funding and provide the basis of the FifthSense research hub.

Commentary on Patient Advocacy and Research Priorities in Olfactory and Gustatory Disorders

Purpose of Review

This paper outlines the challenges faced by people with smell and taste disorders (SATDs) and why patient advocacy is crucial in addressing these. It includes recent findings in identifying research priorities in SATDs.

Recent Findings

A recent Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) conducted with the James Lind Alliance (JLA) has been completed and the top 10 research priorities in SATDs determined. Fifth Sense, a UK charity, has been working alongside patient and healthcare professions to drive awareness, education and research in this area.

Summary

Following the completion of the PSP, Fifth Sense have launched six Research Hubs to take forward these priorities and engage with researchers to carry out and deliver research that directly answers the questions raised by the results of the PSP. The six Research Hubs cover a different aspect of smell and taste disorders. Each hub is led by clinicians and researchers recognised for their expertise in their field, who will act as champions for their respective hub.

Parosmia and Phantosmia: Managing Quality Disorders

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review was to summarize the current knowledge on parosmia and phantosmia and introduce support and treatment algorithms for the two qualitative olfactory disorders.

Recent Findings

Recent literature regarding parosmia has revealed that patients with the disorder are mainly triggered by certain substances, including thiols and pyrazines. In 2015, the existing "olfactory training" regimen was improved to more effectively treat post-infectious olfactory loss and was named "modified olfactory training" (MOT). It was also found in 2022 that MOT is also effective against COVID-19-induced parosmia.

Summary

Parosmia, the distortion of smells, is a symptom in qualitative olfactory disorders that severely affects patients' mental well-being and enjoyment of their everyday lives. The condition was first documented in 1895 and can affect up to 5% of the general population. Etiologies of parosmia include sinonasal diseases, viruses, surgeries, traumatic brain injury, neurological and psychiatric conditions, toxic chemicals, and medications. Parosmia has seen a surge in cases since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and is linked to changes in brain structure following an infection. The evaluation of the symptom is done using surveys, smell identification tests, fMRI, MRI, PET/CT, and gas chromatography. Treatment for parosmia can vary in duration, which makes it essential to focus not only on helping the patients regain normosmia, but also on supporting the patient through the recovery journey. Parosmia should not be confused with phantosmia, in which the distortion of smells occurs in the absence of olfactory stimuli. The etiology of phantosmia can vary from infections and traumatic brain injury to psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia. Unlike parosmia, the treatment of phantosmia is less straightforward, with an emphasis on determining the etiology and providing symptomatic relief.

Parosmia as a predictor of a better olfactory function in COVID-19: a multicentric longitudinal study for upper respiratory tract infections

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the course of olfactory dysfunction [OD] due to upper respiratory tract infections [URTI] especially for COVID-19 [C19] in a multicentric design and to investigate possible predictors for the outcome.

METHODS

In a multicentric study, patients (n = 147, of which 96 were women) with OD due to URTI, including C19 and non-C19 were evaluated at two visits with a standardized medical history and "Sniffin' Sticks" extended psychophysical testing to examine the course and possible predictors for improvement of olfactory function.

RESULTS

C19 patients showed better overall olfactory function (p < 0.001) compared to non-C19. Olfactory function (p < 0.001) improved over 3.5 ± 1.2 months in a comparable fashion for C19 and non-C19 comparable over time (p = 0.20) except for a more pronounced improvement of odour threshold (p = 0.03) in C19. C19 patients with parosmia exhibited a higher probability of clinically relevant improvement of odour threshold, a better threshold in the second visit, and tended to have a better TDI-score at the second visit. Further possible predictors for an improving olfactory function were younger age, female gender, and had lower scores in olfactory tests at the first visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with C19 and non-C19 URTI exhibit a similar improvement over 3-4 months except for the odour threshold, with a better TDI in both visits for C19. For C19 a better prognosis in terms of olfactory recovery was found for younger patients with parosmia and lower olfactory scores at the first visit. Still, for many patients with olfactory loss, an improvement that is experienced as complete may only occur over months and possibly years.

Cross-Cultural Validation of the Short Version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements into Italian: Towards Personalized Patient Care

Given the high burden of olfactory dysfunction worldwide, recently increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is mandatory to adopt a specific questionnaire to assess the impact of olfactory impairment on quality of life, to be used in clinical practice. The aim of this study is to adapt and validate the short version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (svQOD-NS) for Italian. In the pilot phase, the Italian version of the questionnaire (ITA-svQOD-NS) was produced following recommended guidelines. It was then given to 50 healthy subjects and 50 patients (affected by either nasal polyposis or septal deviation), and results were compared to those of other widely used questionnaires. Test-retest reliability was assessed on a sample of 25 patients. All 50 patients repeated the questionnaires at one and nine months after surgery. The internal consistency of ITA-svQOD-NS measured with Cronbach α was excellent (α = 0.92). The intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was also optimal (0.93; 95%CI: 0.90-0.96). Concurrent validity tested with the Pearson coefficient was significant with all other tests administered; also, concerning responsiveness, statistically significant differences were obtained between pre- and post-operative conditions. ITA-svQOD-NS showed high internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and significant correlation with all most-used clinical questionnaires; thus, it can be efficiently applied to assess olfaction-related QoL in the Italian population.

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Olfactory dysfunction is a common consequence of COVID-19 infection and persistent symptoms can have a profound impact on quality of life. At present there is little guidance on how best to treat this condition. A variety of interventions have been suggested to promote recovery, including medication and olfactory training. However, it is uncertain whether any intervention is of benefit. This is an update of the 2021 review with one additional study added.  OBJECTIVES: 1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection.  2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021.   SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance that had persisted for at least four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies with 30 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant and palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin.  Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 18 participants who had anosmia for at least 30 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 15-day course of oral corticosteroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 40 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. Palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 12 participants who had anosmia or hyposmia for at least 90 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 30-day course of palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 30 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.

Interventions for the prevention of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the pandemic has resulted in a large number of individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance. This is an update of the 2021 review with four studies added.

OBJECTIVES

1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with acute olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection.  2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance, which had been present for less than four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included five studies with 691 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: intranasal corticosteroid sprays, intranasal corticosteroid drops, intranasal hypertonic saline and zinc sulphate.  Intranasal corticosteroid spray compared to no intervention/placebo We included three studies with 288 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for less than four weeks following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on both self-rated recovery of olfactory function and recovery of olfactory function using psychophysical tests at up to four weeks follow-up (self-rated: risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; psychophysical testing: RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.63; 1 study; 77 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Change in sense of smell The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on self-rated change in the sense of smell (at less than 4 weeks: mean difference (MD) 0.5 points lower, 95% CI 1.38 lower to 0.38 higher; 1 study; 77 participants; at > 4 weeks to 3 months: MD 2.4 points higher, 95% CI 1.32 higher to 3.48 higher; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence, rated on a scale of 1 to 10, higher scores mean better olfactory function). Intranasal corticosteroids may make little or no difference to the change in sense of smell when assessed with psychophysical testing (MD 0.2 points, 95% CI 2.06 points lower to 2.06 points higher; 1 study; 77 participants; low-certainty evidence, 0- to 24-point scale, higher scores mean better olfactory function).  Serious adverse effects The authors of one study reported no adverse effects, but their intention to collect these data was not pre-specified so we are uncertain if these were systematically sought and identified. The remaining two studies did not report on adverse effects.  Intranasal corticosteroid drops compared to no intervention/placebo We included one study with 248 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for ≤ 15 days following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function Intranasal corticosteroid drops may make little or no difference to self-rated recovery at > 4 weeks to 3 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.11; 1 study; 248 participants; low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were assessed by this study.  Data on the use of hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and the use of zinc sulphate to prevent persistent olfactory dysfunction are included in the full text of the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for preventing persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.

Riech- und Schmeckstörungen

Ziel der vorliegenden Übersicht ist es, einen Überblick über die Ätiologie und Diagnostik von Riech- und Schmeckstörungen zu geben. Da etwa 5 % der Allgemeinbevölkerung betroffen sind, ist es ein häufiges Krankheitsbild. Riechen und Schmecken erhielten v. a. zuletzt Aufmerksamkeit während des Aufkommens der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie, wobei eine plötzlich aufgetretene Riech- und/oder Schmeckstörung zu den typischen Symptomen zählt. Daneben sind Riechstörungen in der Frühdiagnostik neurodegenerativer Erkrankungen von Bedeutung. Häufig zeigen Patienten mit Riechstörungen Zeichen einer Depression. Die Auswirkungen von Riech‑/Schmeckstörungen sind also umfangreich, die Therapiemöglichkeiten aktuell begrenzt. Nach einem Einblick in die Ätiologie werden Diagnostik und Therapiemöglichkeiten auf dem aktuellen Stand der Literatur erörtert. Auch zukunftsweisende Behandlungsvorstellungen, wie z. B. autologe Schleimhauttransplantationen oder olfaktorische Implantate, werden angesprochen.

[Olfactory and gustatory disorders]

Ziel der vorliegenden Übersicht ist es, einen Überblick über die Ätiologie und Diagnostik von Riech- und Schmeckstörungen zu geben. Da etwa 5 % der Allgemeinbevölkerung betroffen sind, ist es ein häufiges Krankheitsbild. Riechen und Schmecken erhielten v. a. zuletzt Aufmerksamkeit während des Aufkommens der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie, wobei eine plötzlich aufgetretene Riech- und/oder Schmeckstörung zu den typischen Symptomen zählt. Daneben sind Riechstörungen in der Frühdiagnostik neurodegenerativer Erkrankungen von Bedeutung. Häufig zeigen Patienten mit Riechstörungen Zeichen einer Depression. Die Auswirkungen von Riech‑/Schmeckstörungen sind also umfangreich, die Therapiemöglichkeiten aktuell begrenzt. Nach einem Einblick in die Ätiologie werden Diagnostik und Therapiemöglichkeiten auf dem aktuellen Stand der Literatur erörtert. Auch zukunftsweisende Behandlungsvorstellungen, wie z. B. autologe Schleimhauttransplantationen oder olfaktorische Implantate, werden angesprochen.

Genetics of congenital olfactory dysfunction: a systematic review of the literature

Olfaction, as one of our 5 senses, plays an important role in our daily lives. It is connected to proper nutrition, social interaction, and protection mechanisms. Disorders affecting this sense consequently also affect the patients' general quality of life. Because the underlying genetics of congenital olfactory disorders (COD) have not been thoroughly investigated yet, this systematic review aimed at providing information on genes that have previously been reported to be mutated in patients suffering from COD. This was achieved by systematically reviewing existing literature on 3 databases, namely PubMed, Ovid Medline, and ISI Web of Science. Genes and the type of disorder, that is, isolated and/or syndromic COD were included in this study, as were the patients' associated abnormal features, which were categorized according to the affected organ(-system). Our research yielded 82 candidate genes/chromosome loci for isolated and/or syndromic COD. Our results revealed that the majority of these are implicated in syndromic COD, a few accounted for syndromic and isolated COD, and the least underly isolated COD. Most commonly, structures of the central nervous system displayed abnormalities. This study is meant to assist clinicians in determining the type of COD and detecting potentially abnormal features in patients with confirmed genetic variations. Future research will hopefully expand this list and thereby further improve our understanding of COD.

Restoration of olfactory dysfunctions by nanomaterials and stem cells-based therapies: Current status and future perspectives

Dysfunction in the olfactory system of a person can have adverse effects on their health and quality of life. It can even increase mortality among individuals. Olfactory dysfunction is related to many factors, including post-viral upper respiratory infection, head trauma, and neurodegenerative disorders. Although some clinical therapies such as steroids and olfactory training are already available, their effectiveness is limited and controversial. Recent research in the field of therapeutic nanoparticles and stem cells has shown the regeneration of dysfunctional olfactory systems. Thus, we are motivated to highlight these regenerative approaches. For this, we first introduce the anatomical characteristics of the olfactory pathway, then detail various pathological factors related to olfactory dysfunctions and current treatments, and then finally discuss the recent regenerative endeavors, with particular focus on nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems and stem cells. This review offers insights into the development of future therapeutic approaches to restore and regenerate dysfunctional olfactory systems.

Cortical Atrophy, White Matter Lesions, and Bulb Configuration in Patients with Idiopathic Olfactory Loss and Other Causes of Olfactory Loss

INTRODUCTION

While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not included in the current guidelines for diagnosing olfactory disorders in the most recent position paper on olfactory dysfunction, both 1.5T and 3T MRI are commonly used in the diagnostic workup of many patients with olfactory loss. Often, MRI is used to rule out intracranial tumours, but other useful information may be obtained from MRI scans in these patients. The potential of MRI in olfactory loss depends on sufficient knowledge of structural changes in different aetiologies of olfactory loss. We present common clinical MRI findings in olfactory loss and evaluate the usefulness of structural integrity scores in differentiating between aetiologies.

METHODS

In this study, we investigated if white matter hyperintensities (WMHs, measured by Fazekas score), global cortical atrophy (GCA), and medial temporal lobe atrophy (MTA) are more common in patients with idiopathic olfactory loss than in patients with acquired olfactory loss due to other aetiologies. Furthermore, we compared olfactory bulb (OB) configurations in different olfactory loss aetiologies.

RESULTS

In 88 patients with olfactory loss, WMHs, GCA, and MTA were not more significant findings on MRI in idiopathic olfactory loss (n = 51) compared with other causes of acquired olfactory loss (Fazekas score p = 0.2977; GCA score p = 0.6748; MTA score p = 0.7851). Bulb configurations differed in patients suffering from post-traumatic olfactory loss and may aid in identifying the underlying aetiology in patients where trauma is among the suspected causes of olfactory loss.

CONCLUSION

We recommend that structural MRI with an OB sequence is included in the diagnostic evaluation of olfactory loss with suspected congenital and post-traumatic aetiology and should be considered in idiopathic olfactory loss with suspected central aetiology (e.g., tumour).

A study of depression, partnership and sexual satisfaction in patients with post-traumatic olfactory disorders

Post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction (PTOD) is associated with a significant decrease in quality of life. The present study aimed to explore whether PTOD is associated with depression and changes in sexuality. There were two groups in this case-control study. The patient group consisted of patients with PTOD (n = 55), and the control group comprised healthy individuals without the olfactory disorder (n = 115). Olfactory function, depression, partnership, and sexual satisfaction were assessed using the Iranian version of the Sniffin' Sticks test (Ir-SST), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Enrich Couple Scale (ECS) and Sexual Satisfaction Scale for Women (SSSW). The BDI scores were higher in the patient group than in the control group (p < 0.001). The SSSW score was lower in the patient group than in controls (p < 0.01), although the ECS score was not significantly different between patients and controls. Also, there was no significant difference in the severity of trauma between marital satisfaction and sexual satisfaction. However, the analysis showed a statistically significant difference in depression scores in connection with the head trauma severity. In the PTOD group, depression was increased and sexual satisfaction declined. Understanding the association of olfactory dysfunction with depression and sexuality allows patients and doctors to deal with less notable consequences of this disorder.

Qualitative Olfactory Disorders: Patient Experiences and Self-Management

Background

Qualitative olfactory disorders in the form of parosmia and phantosmia are very subjective and cannot be measured at present. They pose an unpleasant experience for patients and a therapeutic challenge for clinicians.

Objective

This study aimed to characterise the specific experiences of patients affected by the qualitative symptoms of parosmia and phantosmia including both triggers for symptoms and self-help measures they have tried.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey questionnaire was developed with the input of patient experts within the charity Fifth Sense. The survey was then open online for 3 months to charity members complaining of qualitative symptoms. The survey captured the frequency and impact of symptoms and self-management undertaken. Reflective feedback was also captured from a patient workshop.

Results

There were 100 participants; 61% female, age range 13-88. Common self-reported aetiology included sinonasal disease (17%), idiopathic (33%) and post-viral olfactory loss (26%) and post-traumatic olfactory loss (23%). Parosmia was reported as a daily symptom in 67% compared to 31% for phantosmia; 36% complained of suffering with both symptoms. Only 4% of respondents reported having received any successful treatment for their qualitative symptoms and 58% reported having received no treatment whatsoever. Olfactory training was the most common self-management method reported.

Conclusion

This study illustrates that qualitative disturbances remain problematic for those who experience them due to the duration of symptoms, the relative lack of experience or knowledge amongst medical professionals and the lack of therapeutic options. In future, consideration needs to be given to adaptation and coping strategies to help patients deal with these symptoms.

Endoscopic balloon dilatation of the olfactory cleft - a feasibility study of a novel technique in cadavers

Objective

Smell dysfunctions are common with almost 20% percent of the population affected. There are no interventional solutions for these patients. The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility and security of the balloon dilatation technique.

Methods

This paper describes interventional steps and determines the feasibility and safety of endoscopic olfactory cleft dilatation via balloon device. We included 10 nasal cavities in the study and dilated olfactory cleft areas via balloon device.

Results

We could smoothly perform the procedure and did not observe any fractures on the skull base or olfactory cleft of the cadavers after dilatation.

Conclusions

A combination of this intervention with medical treatments can be promising for smell dysfunctions.

Interventions for the prevention of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a cardinal symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the ongoing pandemic has resulted in a large number of affected individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions that have been used, or proposed, to prevent persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. A secondary objective is to keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register; Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 16 December 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials including participants who had symptoms of olfactory disturbance following COVID-19 infection. Individuals who had symptoms for less than four weeks were included in this review. Studies compared any intervention with no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were the presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included one study of 100 participants, which compared an intranasal steroid spray to no intervention. Participants in both groups were also advised to undertake olfactory training for the duration of the trial. Data were identified for only two of the prespecified outcomes for this review, and no data were available for the primary outcome of serious adverse effects. Intranasal corticosteroids compared to no intervention (all using olfactory training) Presence of normal olfactory function after three weeks of treatment was self-assessed by the participants, using a visual analogue scale (range 0 to 10, higher scores = better). A score of 10 represented "completely normal smell sensation". The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroids on self-rated recovery of sense of smell (estimated absolute effect 619 per 1000 compared to 520 per 1000, risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Change in sense of smell was not reported, but the self-rated score for sense of smell was reported at the endpoint of the study with the same visual analogue scale (after three weeks of treatment). The median scores at endpoint were 10 (interquartile range (IQR) 9 to 10) for the group receiving intranasal corticosteroids, and 10 (IQR 5 to 10) for the group receiving no intervention (1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence regarding the efficacy of different interventions at preventing persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a small number of additional ongoing studies in this area. As this is a living systematic review, the evidence will be updated regularly to incorporate new data from these, and other relevant studies, as they become available.  For this (first) version of the living review, we identified a single study of intranasal corticosteroids to include in this review, which provided data for only two of our prespecified outcomes. The evidence was of very low certainty, therefore we were unable to determine whether intranasal corticosteroids may have a beneficial or harmful effect.

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Olfactory dysfunction is an early and sensitive marker of COVID-19 infection. Although self-limiting in the majority of cases, when hyposmia or anosmia persists it can have a profound effect on quality of life. Little guidance exists on the treatment of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction, however several strategies have been proposed from the evidence relating to the treatment of post-viral anosmia (such as medication or olfactory training).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions that have been used, or proposed, to treat persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. A secondary objective is to keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register; Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 16 December 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials including participants who had symptoms of olfactory disturbance following COVID-19 infection. Only individuals who had symptoms for at least four weeks were included in this review. Studies compared any intervention with no treatment or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one study with 18 participants, which compared the use of a 15-day course of oral steroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) with no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at baseline, 20 and 40 days. Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention Recovery of sense of smell was assessed after 40 days (25 days after cessation of treatment) using the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) score. This tool has a range of 0 to 100, and a score of ≥ 90 represents normal olfactory function. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this intervention on recovery of the sense of smell at one to three months (5/9 participants in the intervention group scored ≥ 90 compared to 0/9 in the control group; risk ratio (RR) 11.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 173.66; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Change in sense of smell was assessed using the CCCRC score at 40 days. This study reported an improvement in sense of smell in the intervention group from baseline (median improvement in CCCRC score 60, interquartile range (IQR) 40) compared to the control group (median improvement in CCCRC score 30, IQR 25) (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events andother adverse events were not identified in any participants of this study; however, it is unclear how these outcomes were assessed and recorded (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified other ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available. For this (first) version of the living review we identified only one study with a small sample size, which assessed systemic steroids and nasal irrigation (intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant). However, the evidence regarding the benefits and harms from this intervention to treat persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction is very uncertain.

Barriers to effective health care for patients who have smell or taste disorders

Objectives

Smell/taste disturbances are a common but underrated, under‐researched and under treated sensory loss and an independent risk factor for reduced longevity. This study aimed to characterise the experience of patients with these disorders in seeking help.

Design

The study was designed by patients together with clinicians through a dedicated workshop and conducted as a cross‐sectional survey to capture experiences in public and private healthcare settings internationally.

Setting

Primary, secondary and tertiary care.

Participants

Any members of the public self‐reporting a smell/taste disorder were invited to participate.

Main outcome measures

The survey captured information including experience of getting consultations and referrals to medical professionals, treatments offered, costs incurred and related problems with mental health.

Results

Of 673 participants; 510 female, 160 male, three not stated, self‐reported aetiology included sinonasal disease (24%), idiopathic (24%) and post‐viral olfactory dysfunction (22%); true gustatory disorders were typically rare. Failure of medical professionals to recognise the problem was a key concern ‐ 64%, 76% and 47% of GPs, ENT specialists and Neurologists acknowledged, respectively. Other issues included repeated ineffective treatments, difficulties getting referrals to secondary/tertiary care, mental health problems (60%) and a mean personal cost of £421 to seeking advice and treatment. Whilst the participants were self‐selecting, however, they do represent those who are seeking help and intervention for their disorders.

Conclusion

There is an unmet need for these patients in accessing health care including a clear need to improve education of and engagement with the medical profession in Otorhinolaryngology, General Practice and other specialties, in order to remove the current barriers they face.

Acupuncture is associated with a positive effect on odour discrimination in patients with postinfectious smell loss-a controlled prospective study

Introduction

Smell disorders are common in the general population and occur e.g., after infections, trauma or idiopathically Treatment strategies for smell loss range from surgery, medication to olfactory training, depending on the pathology, but they are limited This study examined the effect of acupuncture on olfactory function.

Methods

Sixty patients with smell loss following infections of the upper respiratory tract were included in this investigation Half of the study group were randomly assigned to verum acupuncture and the other half to sham acupuncture Olfaction was measured by means of the “Sniffin’ Sticks” test battery (odour threshold, discrimination and identification).

Results

Compared to sham acupuncture, verum was associated with an improvement of smell function as measured by the TDI score (p = 0.039) The improvement was largely determined by improvement in odour discrimination, and was significantly better in patients with a shorter duration of the disorder.

Conclusion

The present results suggest that acupuncture is an effective supplementary treatment option for patients with olfactory loss.

Data-science based analysis of perceptual spaces of odors in olfactory loss

Diminished sense of smell impairs the quality of life but olfactorily disabled people are hardly considered in measures of disability inclusion. We aimed to stratify perceptual characteristics and odors according to the extent to which they are perceived differently with reduced sense of smell, as a possible basis for creating olfactory experiences that are enjoyed in a similar way by subjects with normal or impaired olfactory function. In 146 subjects with normal or reduced olfactory function, perceptual characteristics (edibility, intensity, irritation, temperature, familiarity, hedonics, painfulness) were tested for four sets of 10 different odors each. Data were analyzed with (i) a projection based on principal component analysis and (ii) the training of a machine-learning algorithm in a 1000-fold cross-validated setting to distinguish between olfactory diagnosis based on odor property ratings. Both analytical approaches identified perceived intensity and familiarity with the odor as discriminating characteristics between olfactory diagnoses, while evoked pain sensation and perceived temperature were not discriminating, followed by edibility. Two disjoint sets of odors were identified, i.e., d = 4 “discriminating odors” with respect to olfactory diagnosis, including cis-3-hexenol, methyl salicylate, 1-butanol and cineole, and d = 7 “non-discriminating odors”, including benzyl acetate, heptanal, 4-ethyl-octanoic acid, methional, isobutyric acid, 4-decanolide and p-cresol. Different weightings of the perceptual properties of odors with normal or reduced sense of smell indicate possibilities to create sensory experiences such as food, meals or scents that by emphasizing trigeminal perceptions can be enjoyed by both normosmic and hyposmic individuals.

Patient Experiences of Postinfectious Olfactory Dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

To highlight the importance of the need for new treatment modalities, this study aimed to characterise the experience of patients with postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) in terms of the treatment they received.

METHODS

An online survey was hosted by the Norwich Clinical Trials Unit on the secure REDCap server. Members of the charity Fifth Sense (the UK charity that represents and supports people affected by smell and taste disorders) were invited to participate.

RESULTS

There were 149 respondents, of whom 127 had identified themselves as having (or had) PIOD. The age range of respondents to the survey was 28-85 years, with a mean of 58 ± 12 years, with the duration of their disorder <5 years in 63% of cases. Respondents reported experiencing variable treatment with oral and/or intranasal steroids given typically (28%), often with no benefit, but with 50% receiving no treatment whatsoever; only 3% reported undertaking olfactory training. Over two-thirds of patients experience parosmia and, up to 5 years from the onset of the problem, were still actively seeking a solution.

CONCLUSION

There appears to be a need to encourage greater use of guidelines for olfactory disorders amongst medical practitioners and also to develop more effective treatments for patients with PIOD, where there is clearly an unmet need.

Prognostic value of olfactory evoked potentials in patients with post-infectious olfactory dysfunction

PURPOSE

Prognostic assessment of patients with post-infectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) poses a challenge for clinicians. While there have been some studies on the prognostic factors of PIOD focusing on demographic factors, the aim of this study was to investigate whether event-related potentials (ERPs) could be used as a new predictor of olfactory recovery in PIOD.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study involving patients who underwent olfactory examinations using Sniffin' Sticks test before treatment and after 1 year of follow-up. The responder group was defined by an increase of threshold-discrimination-identification (TDI) score of ≥ 6 points. All patients underwent ERP examination and the amplitude and latency of each wave of ERPs were recorded before treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 61 patients (age 47.50 ± 11.04 years, 27 males) were analyzed. The presence of olfactory ERPs (oERPs) was greater in the responder group than in the non-responder group (P = 0.007), while that of trigeminal ERPs (tERPs) did not differ between the two groups (P = 0.346). Logistic-regression analyses showed that factors associated with improvement of subjective olfactory function were duration (OR, 1.604; 95% CI, 1.062-2.423; P = 0.025), initial threshold (odds ratio [OR], 0.043; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.004-0.439; P = 0.008), and latency of N1 in oERPs (OR, 1.007; 95% CI, 1.001-1.013; P = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that duration of OD, initial threshold, and latency of N1 in oERPs were associated with olfactory improvement in PIOD patients, which may provide guidance for clinicians.

Effects of Olfactory Training in Patients With Postinfectious Olfactory Dysfunction

OBJECTIVES

Postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD) is the most common etiology of olfactory dysfunction, and olfactory training (OT) is an accepted treatment modality for PIOD. Some studies have investigated OT in Korean patients, but they involved odorants unfamiliar to Koreans or had no control group. The aim of this study was to verify the efficacy of OT in PIOD patients, using odorants familiar to Koreans and including a control group.

METHODS

We enrolled a total of 104 Korean patients with PIOD over the 3-year study period. All participants were assessed using endoscopy and an olfactory function test at the baseline assessment and 3 months after OT. The olfactory function test was performed using the Korean version of Sniffin' stick (KVSS) II. Nasal and psychological function was evaluated using a visual analog scale and the Mini-Mental State Examination. OT was performed over a period of 3 months, using five odorants (rose, lemon, cinnamon, orange, and peach).

RESULTS

OT improved olfactory function in approximately 40% of subjects over a period of 12 weeks compared to non-OT subjects. A comparison of changes between the initial and follow-up assessments demonstrated that the OT group had significantly better olfactory results for the total KVSS II, threshold, and identification scores than the non-OT group. The degree of olfactory improvement after OT was affected by the initial score.

CONCLUSION

The effects of OT in patients with PIOD were demonstrated in this study. A meaningful contribution of this study is that Korean patients were tested using odors familiar to them in comparison with a control group.

Clinical Olfactory Working Group consensus statement on the treatment of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Respiratory tract viruses are the second most common cause of olfactory dysfunction. As we learn more about the effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with the recognition that olfactory dysfunction is a key symptom of this disease process, there is a greater need than ever for evidence-based management of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD).

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to provide an evidence-based practical guide to the management of PIOD (including post-coronavirus 2019 cases) for both primary care practitioners and hospital specialists.

METHODS

A systematic review of the treatment options available for the management of PIOD was performed. The written systematic review was then circulated among the members of the Clinical Olfactory Working Group for their perusal before roundtable expert discussion of the treatment options. The group also undertook a survey to determine their current clinical practice with regard to treatment of PIOD.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 467 citations, of which 107 articles were fully reviewed and analyzed for eligibility; 40 citations fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 11 of which were randomized controlled trials. In total, 15 of the articles specifically looked at PIOD whereas the other 25 included other etiologies for olfactory dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

The Clinical Olfactory Working Group members made an overwhelming recommendation for olfactory training; none recommended monocycline antibiotics. The diagnostic role of oral steroids was discussed; some group members were in favor of vitamin A drops. Further research is needed to confirm the place of other therapeutic options.

A Comparison between Mygind and Kaiteki positions in administration of drops to the olfactory cleft

OBJECTIVES

Topical nasal steroids are a common treatment intervention for olfactory dysfunction. Penetration of topical treatment to the olfactory cleft (OC), such as nasal drops, is greatly dependent on the position of the head when the treatment is administered. We aimed to examine the penetrance of nasal drops to the OC in two different head positions: the Mygind (lying head back) position and the Kaiteki position.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The specimens were firstly positioned in Mygind, and thereafter in Kaiteki positions. Nasal drops mixed with blue food dye were administered into the nostrils in each of the head position. Endoscopic videos were recorded, and two blinded observers scored the extent of olfactory cleft penetration (OCP) using a 4-point scale (0 = none, 3 = heavy).

PARTICIPANTS

Twelve fresh-frozen cadaver specimens.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Penetration of the dye into the OC.

RESULTS

The mean score of nasal drops penetrance to the OC in the Mygind position was 1.34 (standard deviation, SD = 0.92), as compared to 1.76 (SD = 0.65) in the Kaiteki position. The difference in the OCP score between the two groups was not statistically significant (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Both Mygind and Kaiteki head positions are reasonable options for patients considering topical nasal drops for olfaction impairment. The preference of one position over the other should be determined by patient's preference and comfort.

Clinical assessment of olfactory function

Approximately 5% of the general population is affected by functional anosmia with approximately additional 15% exhibiting decreased olfactory function. Many of these individuals ask for help. Because the subjective rating of olfactory function is biased, assessment of olfactory function is important. Olfactory measurements are needed for patient counseling and the tracking of changes in the sense of smell over time. The present review provides an overview of frequently used psychophysical tests for olfactory function, discusses differences between threshold and suprathreshold aspects of olfactory function, and gives examples on how to apply psychophysical tests.

COVID-19 in clinical practice: A narrative synthesis

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first reported in the city of Wuhan, China. The disease rapidly spread to the rest of China, to Southern-East Asia, then to Europe, America, and on to the rest of the world. COVID-19 is associated with a betacoronavirus named SARS-CoV-2. The virus penetrates the organism through the respiratory tract, conveyed by contaminated droplets. The main cell receptor targeted is the surface-bound ACE-2. As of the 26th July 2020, 15,200,000 COVID-19 cases and 650,000 deaths were reported worldwide. The mortality rate is estimated between 1.3 and 18.3%. The reproductive rate without any public health intervention is estimated around 4-5.1 in France. Most hospitalized patients for COVID-19 present respiratory symptoms, which in some cases is associated with fever. Up to 86% of admissions to ICU are related to acute respiratory failure. To date, no anti-viral therapy has proven its efficacy considering randomized trials. Only immunomodulatory treatments such as corticosteroids have shown to cause significant improvement in patient outcome.

Is loss of sense of smell a diagnostic marker in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

To systematically review the currently available evidence investigating the association between olfactory dysfunction (OD) and the novel coronavirus (COVID‐19). To analyse the prevalence of OD in patients who have tested positive on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for COVID‐19. To perform a meta‐analysis of patients presenting with olfactory dysfunction, during the pandemic, and to investigate the positive predictive value for a COVID‐19‐positive result in this population. To assess whether olfactory dysfunction could be used as a diagnostic marker for COVID‐19 positivity and aid public health approaches in tackling the current outbreak.

Methods

We systematically searched MedLine (PubMed), Embase, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC), Medrxiv, the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane COVID‐19 Study Register, NIHR Dissemination centre, Clinical Evidence, National Health Service Evidence and the National Institute of Clinical Excellence to identify the current published evidence which associates coronaviridae or similar RNA viruses with anosmia. The initial search identified 157 articles. A total of 145 papers were excluded following application of our exclusion criteria. The 12 remaining articles that presented evidence on the association between COVID‐19 and olfactory dysfunction were critically analysed.

Results

Olfactory dysfunction has been shown to be the strongest predictor of COVID‐19 positivity when compared to other symptoms in logistic regression analysis. In patients who had tested positive for COVID‐19, there was a prevalence of 62% of OD. In populations of patients who are currently reporting OD, there is a positive predictive value of 61% for a positive COVID‐19 result.

Conclusion

Our review has shown that there is already significant evidence which demonstrates an association between OD and the novel coronavirus—COVID‐19. It is unclear if this finding is unique to this coronavirus as individual viral phenotypes rarely present in such concentrated large numbers. We have demonstrated that OD is comparatively more predictive for COVID‐19 positivity compared to other associated symptoms. We recommend that people who develop OD during the pandemic should be self‐isolate and this guidance should be adopted internationally to prevent transmission.

Identification of Viruses in Patients With Postviral Olfactory Dysfunction by Multiplex Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction

Objectives/Hypothesis

To investigate causative viruses in patients with postviral olfactory disorders (PVOD).

Study Design

Case‐control study.

Methods

One hundred fifty‐one consecutive patients diagnosed with PVOD were enrolled, and samples from 38 patients who visited the doctor within 3 months of symptom onset were collected and analyzed. Thirty‐two individuals who underwent surgery for nasal septal deviation during the same time period were collected as the control group. The Sniffin' Sticks psychophysical olfactory test was used to evaluate olfactory function. Olfactory cleft specimens were collected using nasopharyngeal flocked swabs (COPAN FLOQSwabs). Eighteen viruses were tested for with the Luminex xTAG RVP FAST v2 Assay Kit.

Results

Out of the 38 patients with PVOD, rhinoviruses were detected in 13 patients, and coronavirus OC43 was detected in one patient. The frequency of positive virus detection in the patients with anosmia was higher than in those with hyposmia (58.8% vs. 19.0%, P = 0.018). In control group, rhinovirus was identified in one patient (3.1%). Nasal obstruction was the most common symptom and was experienced by 71.0% of patients.

Conclusions

Rhinovirus and coronavirus are more commonly identified in PVOD. Our methods represent an approach to screen for viruses that may be involved in PVOD.

Level of Evidence

4 Laryngoscope, 131:158–164, 2021

Olfactory Fluctuation Revisited

OBJECTIVES

Many patients complain about olfactory fluctuation (OF), which is a symptom commonly attributed to sinonasal disease. Data-based evidence for its association with sinonasal disease is scarce. The aim of the study is to identify explanatory variables associated with OF and to analyze its predictive value regarding sinonasal disease.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective study based on patients with olfactory dysfunction.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 482 patients attending the smell and taste outpatient clinic with full psychophysical workup and structured questions regarding their symptoms. The questionnaire included items on OF and chronic nasal symptoms. Clinical investigators filled out the second part of this questionnaire that included information about nasal endoscopy, psychophysical tests of orthonasal olfaction (Sniffin' Sticks), retronasal olfaction, and putative etiology of olfactory dysfunction.

RESULTS

OF was more prevalent in sinonasal disease (42.4%) compared to other putative etiologies of olfactory dysfunction such as postinfectious (28%) or posttraumatic (11.7%) (X2 [5, n = 440] = 24.98; P < .0001). OF was strongly associated with Sniffin' Sticks score categories (anosmia, hyposmia, normosmia) (X2 [2, n = 424] = 39.21; P < .0001; Cramer's V = 0.30; P < .0001) and presence of "chronic nasal symptoms" (X2 [1, n = 437] = 22.71; P < .0001; Cramer's V = 0.23; P < .0001). The accuracy in predicting putative sinonasal disease etiology when OF was present depended strongly on the clinical context.

CONCLUSION

Olfactory fluctuation is a symptom mostly but not exclusively associated with sinonasal disease, elevated Sniffin' Sticks test scores, and is frequently accompanied by other nasal complaints. Its presence is valuable information for clinicians to be integrated into the clinical context when doing patients' workup.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 130:2442-2447, 2020.

Differences in Mechanisms of Steroid Therapy and Olfactory Training for Olfactory Loss in Mice

Objective

Steroid therapy and olfactory training are common treatments for olfactory loss. Systemic steroid treatment is the most effective approach for treating sinonasal olfactory loss. Olfactory training is typically effective for treating sensorineural olfactory loss. However, the differences in mechanisms of steroid therapy and olfactory training for olfactory dysfunction are unclear. The aim of this study was thus to evaluate the differences in mechanisms of olfactory training and steroid therapy.

Subjects and Methods

Mice in each group were administered 3-methylindole at a dose of 300 mg/kg. Olfactory function was evaluated with a food-finding test once a week. The olfactory neuroepithelium was harvested for histologic examination and protein analysis. Subsequently, data analysis, gene ontology and pathway analysis, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction of mRNA, and western blot analysis were conducted.

Results

Mice were divided into four groups according to treatment. Control, anosmia, training, and steroid groups resumed food-finding. MMP27, CCL22 and IL18rap mRNA expression were significantly increased in the training group compared to that in the steroid group. IL1R2 mRNA expression was significantly higher in the olfactory neuroepithelium of steroid-treated mice than in that of the training group mice.

Conclusions

Steroid therapy improved olfactory function via anti-inflammatory effects, unlike olfactory training which involved cell regeneration and tissue remodeling. Protein and gene analyses revealed that steroid therapy and olfactory training are underpinned by distinct mechanisms. Selection of the most appropriate treatment will be dependent on the cause of olfactory loss.

The Association Between Smoking on Olfactory Dysfunction in 3,900 Patients With Olfactory Loss

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

The association between smoking and olfactory loss remains a conundrum. Prior studies have found negative and positive effects of smoking on olfactory function in the general population. However, smoking cessation seems to improve both rated and measured olfactory function. The purpose of this study was to investigate the olfactory function and smoking habits in patients with olfactory loss caused by different etiologies to unveil underlying patterns related to smoking.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

METHODS

Patients were included from two specialized taste and smell centers. Patients underwent olfactory testing, clinical examination including rhinoscopy, and the underlying etiology was identified. Patterns of olfactory test scores, demographics, and etiologies were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 3,900 patients with olfactory loss were included. Of these, 521 were current smokers, and 316 were former smokers. Patients with a history of smoking did not have significantly lower olfactory function. Current smokers were more often affected by posttraumatic olfactory loss, but not sinonasal, postviral, or idiopathic olfactory loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Current smoking, but not former smoking, was associated with posttraumatic olfactory loss. In relation to measured olfactory function, a history of smoking was not associated to lower olfactory scores. Our findings suggest that the general recommendations of smoking cessation for patients with olfactory loss are especially relevant for patients with posttraumatic olfactory loss. The nature of this association between current smoking and posttraumatic olfactory loss has yet to be elucidated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2b Laryngoscope, 131:E8-E13, 2021.

An unmet need: Patients with smell and taste disorders

OBJECTIVES

There are large numbers of patients with olfactory disturbance in the UK and shortfalls in assessment and support amongst mainstream practice in both primary and secondary care leading to significant quality-of-life impairment and potential missed diagnoses. The aim of this study was to determine the key themes which can be identified from the accounts of anosmia sufferers and to identify important areas to target for future research or service development.

DESIGN

Qualitative analysis of written patient accounts from patients corresponding with a tertiary smell and taste clinic in the UK. This qualitative study utilised unstructured written patient accounts from consenting patients experiencing olfactory disturbances received by the smell and taste clinic. Framework analysis was performed using Nvivo 10 software.

SETTING

Tertiary smell and taste clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Consenting patients who contacted the smell and taste clinic with accounts of their experiences.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Themes generated by qualitative analysis with Nvivo software.

RESULTS

Accounts submitted by 71 participants were included in the analysis; age range 31-80 years, 45 females, 26 males. Themes identified include negative emotional impact, feelings of isolation, impaired relationships and daily functioning, impact on physical health and the difficulty and financial burden of seeking help.

CONCLUSIONS

Olfactory disturbances have a wide-ranging impact on the lives of sufferers, compounded by a lack of knowledge of the disorder amongst clinicians. There is a role for further support and education both for sufferers and for clinicians, as well as a need to improve our understanding of olfactory disturbance.

Validation of the olfactory disorders questionnaire for English-speaking patients with olfactory disorders

OBJECTIVES

To adapt the existing German language olfactory disorders questionnaire for use with English-speaking patients. To validate the adapted version for routine clinical use.

DESIGN

The translated version of the original German questionnaire was revised with a patient and a clinician to reflect British language and culture. Patients attending an olfactory dysfunction clinic were recruited to perform the adapted questionnaire on two occasions at least 1 month apart. Additional online participants completed the questionnaire via the charity Fifth Sense.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Retest reliability of the English olfactory disorders questionnaire (eODQ) in affected patients including potential for redundancy in any of the included questions. Correlation of eODQ scores with Sniffin' Sticks scores.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients reporting olfactory dysfunction were recruited and had a mean age of 48 with 35% of them being male; 50 datasets were available for analysis. A total of 957 members of the charity entered responses into the online questionnaire; 699 responses could be scored with participants' mean age of 55 years and with 69% reporting as female. The eODQ score and Sniffin' Sticks threshold, discrimination and identification score at timepoint 1 were correlated to assess for concurrent validity, (r = -0.15, P = 0.17) and showed no significant correlation. Female participants had a significantly higher mean total eODQ score than men, 55.75 compared to 52.28 (P = 0.001). The average score was 54.7 (SD 13.5) with a range from 26 to 87. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was good with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.90 (confidence intervals 0.89, 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the use of the eODQ in a native English-speaking population and highlight the different distinctions between "objective" testing of olfaction with the Sniffin' Sticks test, and the patient reported impact of olfactory dysfunction on daily life. These two types of assessment can be easily administered in an outpatient setting and used in the assessment and management of olfactory dysfunction.

Olfactory dysfunction revisited: a reappraisal of work-related olfactory dysfunction caused by chemicals

Occupational exposure to numerous individual chemicals has been associated with olfactory dysfunction, mainly in individual case descriptions. Comprehensive epidemiological investigations into the olfactotoxic effect of working substances show that the human sense of smell may be impaired by exposure to metal compounds involving cadmium, chromium and nickel, and to formaldehyde. This conclusion is supported by the results of animal experiments. The level of evidence for a relationship between olfactory dysfunction and workplace exposure to other substances is relatively weak.

Olfactory dysfunction revisited: a reappraisal of work-related olfactory dysfunction caused by chemicals

Occupational exposure to numerous individual chemicals has been associated with olfactory dysfunction, mainly in individual case descriptions. Comprehensive epidemiological investigations into the olfactotoxic effect of working substances show that the human sense of smell may be impaired by exposure to metal compounds involving cadmium, chromium and nickel, and to formaldehyde. This conclusion is supported by the results of animal experiments. The level of evidence for a relationship between olfactory dysfunction and workplace exposure to other substances is relatively weak.