The coronavirus disease 2019: the prevalence, prognosis, and recovery from olfactory dysfunction (OD)

COVID-19 and anosmia: The story so far

OBJECTIVES

The pandemic has affected over 182 million coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases worldwide. Accumulated evidence indicates that anosmia is one of the significant characteristics of COVID-19 with a high prevalence. However, many aspects of COVID-19-induced anosmia are still far from being fully understood. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent developments in COVID-19-induced anosmia to increase awareness of the condition.

METHODS

A literature search was carried out using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus. We reviewed the latest literature on COVID-19-induced anosmia, including mechanisms of pathogenesis, olfactory testing, anosmia as predictive tool, pathological examinations, imaging findings, affected factors, co-existing diseases, treatments, prognosis, hypothesis theories, and future directions.

RESULTS

The possible pathogenesis of COVID-19-induced anosmia may involve inflammation of the olfactory clefts and damage to the olfactory epithelium or olfactory central nervous system by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The D614G spike variant may also play a role in the increased number of anosmia patients. Anosmia may also be an essential indicator of COVID-19 spread and an early indicator of the effectiveness of political decisions. The occurrence and development of COVID-19-induced anosmia may be influenced by smoking behaviors and underlying diseases such as type 2 diabetes, gastroesophageal disorders, and rhinitis. Most patients with COVID-19-induced anosmia can fully or partially recover their olfactory function for varying durations. COVID-19-induced anosmia can be treated with various approaches such as glucocorticoids and olfactory training.

CONCLUSION

Anosmia is one of the main features of COVID-19 and the underlying disease of the patient may also influence its occurrence and development. The possible pathogenesis of COVID-19-induced anosmia is very complicated, which may involve inflammation of the olfactory clefts and damage to the olfactory epithelium or olfactory central nervous system.

Recovery Patterns of COVID-19 Related Smell Disorders: An Analysis of the Available Evidence

Recently acquired olfactory dysfunction (OD) has emerged as one of hallmark manifestations of the novel Corona virus disease (COVID-19), but the evolution of its spontaneous recovery has remained inconclusive, with reports of persistence of OD beyond six months of onset. We undertook this systematic review and meta-analysis with a view to generating a pooled recovery rate of COVID-19 associated olfactory dysfunctions and attempt to examine the predictors of olfactory recovery. Systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic search of Scopus, Google Scholar, and PubMed data bases, comprising all longitudinal studies reporting the trajectory of COVID-19 related OD was carried out. The pooled recovery rate was estimated with random-effects model, and the potential heterogeneity of the subgroup sources was analyzed using meta-regression test. After the PRISMA selection process 28 studies from 16 countries were included, with a total of 5,175 OD patients, among 11,948 COVID-19 cases. The estimated global pooled recovery rate of OD was 82.7% (95% CI, 77.46%-88.04%), with a pooled median duration of OD of 11.6 days. Only 2 out of 28 studies had recovery data beyond a period of 2 months. But no significant difference was found in the recovery rate regarding the length of follow up (P = 0.840). Studies that conducted objective olfactory assessments showed significant higher recovery rate than those with subjective assessments (P = 0.001). Although ten studies (36%) reported > 90% recovery, nine studies (32%) documented persistence of OD in > 25% of their patients. Five out of 6 studies showed that hyposmia tended to show complete recovery than anosmia. Age, co-morbidities, and intra-nasal treatments had no effects. Test of homogeneity between subgroups using the Cochran's Q test was not significant (Q = 0.69, P = 0.40). Our meta-analysis revealed high rate of early and medium term recovery of COVID-19 related OD. However, it also showed disturbing rates of persistence of OD. Anosmia tended to be predictive of residual OD than hyposmia. Age, co-morbidities, intra-nasal corticosteroid and decongestants, had no effects on OD recovery.

The oral manifestations and related mechanisms of COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported to be associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and patients present mostly with respiratory symptoms. There have been an increasing number of reports on oral manifestations, and some of these signs are informative in terms of identifying SARS-CoV-2 infection. The goal of present study was to review and synthesize the clinical characteristics and underlying mechanisms of COVID-19 oral manifestations, as well as to evaluate the factors influencing SARS-CoV-2 infectivity, in order to conduct further in-depth investigations and help clinicians diagnose COVID-19 patients exhibiting oral symptoms.

Evaluation of the Sensitivity of Prominent Biomarkers Involvement in Diagnosing the Severity of Lung Damage in Patients with COVID-19

Background

COVID-19 has become the greatest pandemic of the century. Considering the role of some hematologic and biochemical factors and their alterations due to the activity of the immune system, the current study aimed to evaluate LDH/CRP/ESR/RDW in patients with COVID-19 and their relationship with the severity of lung involvement based on CT scan findings.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, some biomarkers (LDH/CRP/ESR/RDW) were measured in 158 patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) or hospitalized in the infectious diseases ward of Rasoul-e-Akram and Firoozgar hospitals or attended to the outpatient clinics. The diagnosis was confirmed by a positive RT-PCR test in all patients. The severity of lung involvement was determined by CT scan findings for comparison. Data were collected and analyzed through SPSS version 22.

Results

Regarding the severity of lung damage according to the CT scan, 17.7% of the patients were normal, 19% had less than 25% involvement, 17% had 25% -50% involvement, 33.5% had 50% -75% involvement, and 12% had more than 75% involvement. Considering the increasing severity of lung damage based on CT scans, the levels of RDW, ESR, CRP, and LDH significantly increased in parallel. The diagnostic value of RDW (cut-off point: 12.6, Sen: 73.1% (95%CI: 65.1-79.5), Sp: 53.6% (95%CI: 45.7-61.7), ESR (cut-off point: 49, Sen: 46.9% (95%CI: 38.2-54.5)), Sp: 85.7% (95%CI: 789.-90.5)), CRP (cut-off point: 23, Sen: 62.8% (95%CI: 54.6-70.4), Sp: 77.7% (95%CI: 70.3-84.1)) and LDH (cut-off point: 550, Sen: 65.1% (95%CI: 57.2-72.5), Sp: 85.7% (95%CI: 78.9-90.5)) were significant in diagnosing the severity of lung involvement (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The use of RDW, ESR, CRP, and LDH biomarkers could be effective in predicting the severity of lung damage in patients with COVID-19.

Impaired olfaction post-coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review of smell recovery predictive factors

Background

The devastating coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic seemed not yet to cease. Numerous studies regarding its typical sign and symptoms have been done, presenting one of the most promising predictors of the infection: olfactory dysfunction. Although not life-threatening, the symptom could decrease one’s quality of life, especially if persistent throughout their entire life. Among the countless literature regarding loss of smell, only limited studies denote predictors of smell recovery. This systematic review aimed to bridge the knowledge gap of olfactory impairment prevalence and recovery predictors in people with COVID-19.

Methods

This review was carried out through journal databases, including PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and medRxiv. Literature published from 2020 to 2022 that complied with the inclusion and exclusion criteria was retrieved, scanned for duplicates with Zotero, and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols 2020 (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

Of the 2243 studies, seven were assessed with the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) to analyze the risk of bias, which five cohort studies deemed relevant. Olfactory dysfunction, olfactory recovery, and its predictive factors are noted. This review is registered in PROSPERO (Registration Number CRD42022318412).

Conclusions

No clinical markers predicted the recovery of olfactory dysfunction, but patients who are more likely to recover are associated with younger age, female sex, and having COVID-19-related symptoms such as nasal congestion and trigeminal sensation. Modifiable factors are still dubious in predicting the olfaction recovery.

Olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19, new insights from a cohort of 353 patients: The ANOSVID study

Olfactory disorders (OD) pathogenesis, underlying conditions, and prognostic in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain partially described. ANOSVID is a retrospective study in Nord Franche-Comté Hospital (France) that included COVID-19 patients from March 1 2020 to May 31 2020. The aim was to compare COVID-19 patients with OD (OD group) and patients without OD (no-OD group). A second analysis compared patients with anosmia (high OD group) and patients with hyposmia or no OD (low or no-OD group). The OD group presented less cardiovascular and other respiratory diseases compared to the no-OD group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.536 [0.293-0.981], p = 0.041 and OR = 0.222 [0.056-0.874], p = 0.037 respectively). Moreover, history of malignancy was less present in the high OD group compared with the low or no-OD group (OR = 0.170 [0.064-0.455], p < 0.001). The main associated symptoms (OR > 5) with OD were loss of taste (OR = 24.059 [13.474-42.959], p = 0.000) and cacosmia (OR = 5.821 [2.246-15.085], p < 0.001). Most of all ORs decreased in the second analysis, especially for general, digestive, and ENT symptoms. Only two ORs increased: headache (OR = 2.697 [1.746-4.167], p < 0.001) and facial pain (OR = 2.901 [1.441-5.842], p = 0.002). The high OD group had a higher creatinine clearance CKD than the low or no-OD group (89.0 ± 21.1 vs. 81.0 ± 20.5, p = 0.040). No significant difference was found concerning the virological, radiological, and severity criteria. OD patients seem to have less comorbidity, especially better cardiovascular and renal function. Associated symptoms with OD were mostly neurological symptoms. We did not find a significant relationship between OD and less severity in COVID-19 possibly due to methodological bias.

[Functional and morphological disorders of taste and olfaction in COVID-19 patients]

Ziele

Testen der Prävalenz und Entwicklung akuter olfaktorischer und gustatorischer Funktionsstörungen und ihrer morphologischen Korrelate bei COVID-19-Patienten, die aufgrund von COVID-19-bedingten Atemwegserkrankungen einen Krankenhausaufenthalt benötigen.

Methoden

Eingeschlossen wurden 53 Krankenhauspatienten (23 Männer, 30 Frauen, Alter 42,54 ± 10,95 Jahre) mit RT-PCR-bestätigter COVID-19-Diagnose. Die Patienten wurden zweimal untersucht: direkt nach der Entlassung aus dem Krankenhaus und 4–6 Wochen später. Elektrogustometrische (EGM-)Schwellen im von der Chorda tympani versorgten Zungenbereich, am weichen Gaumen und im Bereich der Papillae vallatae wurden beidseitig erfasst. Der Geruchssinn wurde mit Riechstäbchen untersucht (Sniffin’ Sticks, Burghart GmbH, Wedel, Deutschland). Mittels Kontaktendoskopie wurden die Nasen- und Mundschleimhäute (fungiforme Papillen, fPap) der Patienten untersucht. Die Ergebnisse wurden mit denen von 53 gesunden Personen verglichen (23 Männer, 30 Frauen, Alter 42,90 ± 10,64 Jahre).

Ergebnisse

Die EGM-Schwellenwerte der Patienten waren in beiden Fällen signifikant höher als die der gesunden Probanden. Die EGM-Schwellenwerte bei der 2. Messung waren signifikant niedriger als bei der 1. Messung. Dementsprechend waren die vom Patienten berichteten gustatorischen Ergebnisse bei der 2. Messung verbessert. Dasselbe Muster wurde bei der Verwendung von Sniffin’ Sticks gefunden. Signifikante Veränderungen in Form und Vaskularisierung von fPap wurden bei Patienten festgestellt, insbesondere beim 1. Mal. Bemerkenswert ist, dass keine signifikanten Unterschiede in der Vaskularisation der Nasenschleimhaut der Patienten beobachtet wurden.

Schlussfolgerung

COVID-19 beeinträchtigt sowohl die Geschmacks- als auch die Geruchsfunktion. Es beeinflusst auch parallel die Struktur und Vaskularisierung der Mundschleimhaut, wenn auch die Nasenschleimhaut in einem viel geringeren, nicht signifikanten Ausmaß. Unsere Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass COVID-19 eine leichte bis schwere Neuropathie mehrerer Hirnnerven verursachen kann.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction in COVID-19

Background

Chemosensory disorders associated with COVID-19 have been widely discussed during the pandemic. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the risk factors for olfactory and gustatory dysfunction in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were searched for studies published between December 1, 2019, and August 31, 2021. We selected random-effects model or fixed-effects model to pool data based on heterogeneity. The results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was reported as I².

Results

Twenty-six studies with a total of 13,813 patients were included. The pooled data indicated that sex (OR 1.47; 95% CI 0.93–2.31), age (SMD −5.80; 95% CI −13.35 to 1.75), smoking (OR 2.04; 95% CI 0.72–5.79), and comorbidity (OR 1.21; 95% CI 0.58–2.53) of patients with COVID-19 had no effect on gustatory dysfunction. Olfactory dysfunction was more likely to occur in older patients with COVID-19 (SMD, −5.22; 95% CI, −8.28 to −2.16). Patients with COVID-19 with nasal congestion (OR 3.41; 95% CI 2.30–5.06) and rhinorrhea (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.60–3.45) were more prone to olfactory dysfunction.

Conclusion

These findings emphasize that older patients with COVID-19 are more likely to experience olfactory dysfunction. Symptoms of nasal congestion and rhinorrhea may affect the recognition of olfactory dysfunction.

Olfactory Dysfunction in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is wreaking havoc on public-health and economic systems worldwide. Among the several neurological symptoms of patients with COVID-19 reported in clinical practice, olfactory dysfunction (OD) is the most common. OD occurs as the earliest or the only clinical manifestation in some patients. Increasing research attention has focused on OD, which is listed as one of the main diagnostic symptoms of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 infection. Multiple clinical and basic-science studies on COVID-19-induced OD are underway to clarify the underlying mechanism of action. In this review, we summarize the clinical characteristics, mechanisms, evaluation methods, prognosis, and treatment options of COVID-19-induced OD. In this way, we hope to improve the understanding of COVID-19-induced OD to aid early identification and precise intervention.

Neurological sequelae of COVID-19: a review

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has produced a myriad of challenges, including identifying and treating neurological sequelae.

Main body

COVID-19 can cause olfactory and respiratory dysfunction with average recovery within 1 month and a minority of patients experiencing symptoms at 8-month follow-up. Headaches are also very common (up to 93%) amongst patients with persistent COVID-19 symptoms. COVID-19 illness may also affect cognition, although results are mixed.

Conclusion

While many studies have focused on acute COVID-19 symptoms, more longitudinal studies will need to assess the neurological sequelae of the disease. Furthermore, care must be taken when attributing sequelae to COVID-19 illness and not an unrelated cause. Finally, there is concern that COVID-19 may be associated with secondary illnesses, such as Guillain–Barre, and may even contribute to the development of diseases, such as Alzheimer’s.

What can the neurological manifestations of COVID-19 tell us: a meta-analysis

Background

Covid-19 became a global pandemic in 2019. Studies have shown that coronavirus can cause neurological symptoms, but clinical studies on its neurological symptoms are limited. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to summarize the various neurological manifestations that occurred in COVID-19 patients and calculate the incidence of various neurological manifestations. At the same time, we further explored the mechanism of nervous system injury and prognosis in COVID-19 patients in combination with their nervous system manifestations. This study provides a reference for early clinical identification of COVID-19 nervous system injury in the future, so as to achieve early treatment and reduce neurological sequelae.

Methods

We systematically searched all published English literature related to the neurological manifestations of COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021, in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The keywords used were COVID-19 and terminology related to the nervous system performance. All included studies were selected by two independent reviewers using EndNote and NoteExpress software, any disagreement was resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer, and the selected data were then collected for meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

Results

A total of 168 articles (n = 292,693) were included in the study, and the meta-analysis showed that the most common neurological manifestations of COVID-19 were myalgia(33%; 95%CI 0.30–0.37; I² = 99.17%), smell impairment(33%; 95%CI 0.28–0.38; I² = 99.40%), taste dysfunction(33%; 95%CI 0.27–0.39; I² = 99.09%), altered mental status(32%; 95%CI 0.22–0.43; I² = 99.06%), headache(29%; 95%CI 0.25–0.33; I² = 99.42%), encephalopathy(26%; 95%CI 0.16–0.38; I² = 99.31%), alteration of consciousness(13%; 95%CI 0.08–0.19; I² = 98.10%), stroke(12%; 95%CI 0.08–0.16; I² = 98.95%), dizziness(10%; 95%CI 0.08–0.13; I² = 96.45%), vision impairment(6%; 95%CI 0.03–0.09; I² = 86.82%), intracerebral haemorrhage(5%; 95%CI 0.03–0.09; I² = 95.60%), seizure(4%; 95%CI 0.02 -0.05; I² = 98.15%), encephalitis(2%; 95%CI 0.01–0.03; I² = 90.36%), Guillan-Barré Syndrome (GBS) (1%; 95%CI 0.00–0.03; I² = 89.48%).

Conclusions

Neurological symptoms are common and varied in Covid-19 infections, and a growing number of reports suggest that the prevalence of neurological symptoms may be increasing. In the future, the role of COVID-19 neurological symptoms in the progression of COVID-19 should be further studied, and its pathogenesis and assessment methods should be explored, to detect and treat early neurological complications of COVID-19 and reduce mortality.

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Among Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, Olfactory (OD) and Gustatory (GD) Dysfunctions (OGD) have drawn considerable attention, becoming a sort of hallmark of the disease. Many have speculated on the pathogenesis and clinical characteristics of these disturbances; however, no definite answers have been produced on the topic. With this systematic review, we aimed to collect all the available evidence regarding the prevalence of OGD, the timing of their onset and their resolution, their rate of recovery and their role as diagnostic and prognostic tools for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

METHODS

A systematic review comprising all the observational studies that reported the prevalence and/or the longitudinal trajectories of OGD in COVID-19 patients, as self-reported by patients or measured through objective psychophysical tests.

RESULTS

After the selection process, 155 studies were included, with a total of 70,920 patients and 105,291 not-infected individuals. Prevalence reports were extremely variable across studies, with wide ranges for OD (0%-98%) and GD (0-89%) prevalence. OGD occurred early during the disease course and only rarely preceded other symptoms; out of 30 studies with a follow-up time of at least 20 days, only in 5 studies OGD fully resolved in more than 90% of patients. OGD had low sensitivity and high specificity for SARS-CoV-2 infection; accuracy of OD and GD for infection identification was higher than 80% in 10 out of 33 studies and in 8 out of 22 studies considered, respectively. 28 out of 30 studies that studied the association between OGD and disease severity found how OGD were associated with lower rates of severe pneumonia, hospitalization and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

OGD seem to be highly prevalent in SARS-CoV-2 infection. They occur early, concomitantly with other symptoms and often persist after recovery, in some cases for months; whether a full recovery eventually occurs in all cases is not clear yet. OGD are good predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with a milder disease course.

The course of subjective and objective chemosensory dysfunction in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a 6-month follow-up

Purpose

It has been established that the infection with SARS-CoV-2 may cause an impairment of chemosensory function. However, there is little data on the long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on chemosensory function.

Methods

Twenty three SARS-CoV-2-positive patients diagnosed in spring 2020 with subjective hyposmia (out of 57 positive patients, 40.3%) were compared to SARS-CoV-2-positive patients without hyposmia (n = 19) and SARS-CoV-2-negative patients (n = 14). Chemosensory function was assessed by the Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT), Taste Strips (TS), Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), and the SNOT-22. The initial cohort with hyposmia were also examined at 8 weeks and 6 months after initial examination.

Results

There were no differences between the SARS-CoV-2-positive cohort without hyposmia and negative controls in terms of BSIT (8.5 ± 2.6 vs. 10.2 ± 1.8), TS (3.4 ± 0.6 vs. 3.9 ± 0.3) or VAS (2.1 ± 1.3 vs. 1.1 ± 0.5); yet the SNOT-22 was significantly elevated (27.7 ± 11.2 vs. 16.4 ± 10.8). The SARS-CoV-2-positive group with hyposmia performed significantly poorer in BSIT (4.0 ± 1.7 vs. 8.5 ± 2.6/10.2 ± 1.8), TS (2.6 ± 1.3 vs. 3.4 ± 0.6/3.9 ± 0.3), and VAS (7.9 ± 2.2 vs. 2.1 ± 1.3/1.1 ± 0.5) compared to both control groups. At week 8 and month 6 control, six and five patients, respectively, still suffered from subjectively and objectively impaired chemosensory function. The other patients had recovered in both respects.

Conclusion

SARS-CoV-2 patients with subjectively impaired chemosensory function regularly perform poorly in objective measurements. About 70% of patients suffering from olfactory dysfunction in SARS-CoV-2 quickly recover—the rest still suffers from considerable impairment 6 months after infection.

Smell and Taste Loss Recovery Time in COVID-19 Patients and Disease Severity

A significant proportion of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 report a new onset of smell or taste loss. The duration of the chemosensory impairment and predictive factors of recovery are still unclear. We aimed to investigate the prevalence, temporal course and recovery predictors in patients who suffered from varying disease severity. Consecutive adult patients diagnosed to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 via reverse-transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at two coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) Reference Hospitals were contacted to complete a survey reporting chemosensory loss, severity, timing and duration, nasal symptoms, smoking, allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, comorbidities and COVID-19 severity. In a cross-sectional study, we contacted 182 patients and 150 responded. Excluding the critically ill patients, 38% reported gustatory and 41% olfactory impairment (74% severe/anosmia). Most of the patients (88%) recovered their sense of smell by two months (median: 11.5 days; IQR: 13.3). For 23%, the olfactory loss lasted longer than a month. There were no significant differences in the prevalence and duration of chemosensory loss between groups of varying COVID-19 severity, and sexes (all p > 0.05). Moderate hyposmia resolved quicker than more severe loss (p = 0.04). Smell and taste loss are highly prevalent in COVID-19. Most patients recover fast, but nearly one out of ten have not recovered in two months.