-
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology 2022SARS-CoV-2 is the pathogen of COVID-19. The virus is composed of the spike, membrane and envelope. On physiological smell, odoriferous substances bind to proteins... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
SARS-CoV-2 is the pathogen of COVID-19. The virus is composed of the spike, membrane and envelope. On physiological smell, odoriferous substances bind to proteins secreted by sustentacular cells in order to be processed by olfactory receptor neurons. Olfactory disorder is one of the main manifestations of COVID-19, however, research is still required to clarify the mechanism involved in SARS-CoV-2 induced anosmia.
OBJECTIVE
This article aims to analyze current scientific evidence intended to elucidate the pathophysiological relationship between COVID-19 and the cause of olfactory disorders.
METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, Scopus and ScienceDirect were used to compose this article. The research was conducted on November 24th, 2020. Original articles with experimental studies in human, animal and in vitro, short communications, viewpoint, published in the English language and between 2019 and 2020 were included, all related to the pathophysiological relationship between olfactory disorders and COVID-19 infection.
RESULTS
Both human cell receptors ACE2 and TMPRSS2 are essential for the SARS-CoV-2 entrance. These receptors are mostly present in the olfactory epithelium cells, therefore, the main hypothesis is that anosmia is caused due to damage to non-neuronal cells which, thereafter, affects the normal olfactory metabolism. Furthermore, magnetic resonance imaging studies exhibit a relationship between a reduction on the neuronal epithelium and the olfactory bulb atrophy. Damage to non-neuronal cells explains the average recovery lasting a few weeks. This injury can be exacerbated by an aggressive immune response, which leads to damage to neuronal cells and stem cells inducing a persistent anosmia. Conductive anosmia is not sufficient to explain most cases of COVID-19 induced anosmia.
CONCLUSION
Olfactory disorders such as anosmia and hyposmia can be caused by COVID-19, the main mechanism is associated with olfactory epithelium damage, targeting predominantly non-neuronal cells. However, neuronal cells can also be affected, worsening the condition of olfactory loss.
Topics: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2; Animals; Anosmia; COVID-19; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; SARS-CoV-2; Smell
PubMed: 33965353
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2021.04.001 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2020Some of the symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, cough, and breathing difficulty. However, the mechanism of the disease, including some of the symptoms such as the...
Some of the symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, cough, and breathing difficulty. However, the mechanism of the disease, including some of the symptoms such as the neurological and musculoskeletal symptoms, is still poorly understood. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence on the neurological and musculoskeletal symptoms of the disease. This may help with early diagnosis, prevention of disease spread, and treatment planning. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar (first 100 hits) were searched until April 17, 2020. The key search terms used were "coronavirus" and "signs and symptoms." Only studies written in English were included. The selection was performed by two independent reviewers using EndNote and Rayyan software. Any disagreement was resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer. PRISMA guidelines were followed for abstracting data and assessing the quality of the studies. These were carried out by two and three independent reviewers, respectively. Any disagreement was resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer. The data were analyzed using qualitative synthesis and pooled using a random-effect model. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): The outcomes in the study include country, study design, participant details (sex, age, sample size), and neurological and musculoskeletal features. Sixty studies ( = 11, 069) were included in the review, and 51 studies were used in the meta-analysis. The median or mean age ranged from 24 to 95 years. The prevalence of neurological and musculoskeletal manifestations was 35% for smell impairment (95% CI 0-94%; 99.63%), 33% for taste impairment (95% CI 0-91%; 99.58%), 19% for myalgia (95% CI 16-23; 95%), 12% for headache (95% CI 9-15; 93.12%), 10% for back pain (95% CI 1-23%; 80.20%), 10% for dizziness (95% CI 3-19%; 86.74%), 3% for acute cerebrovascular disease (95% CI 1-5%; 0%), and 2% for impaired consciousness (95% CI 1-2%; 0%). Patients with COVID-19 present with neurological and musculoskeletal symptoms. Therefore, clinicians need to be vigilant in the diagnosis and treatment of these patients.
PubMed: 32676052
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00687 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Oct 2020Preterm and full-term neonates undergo many painful procedures during their hospitalization in the neonatal intensive care unit. Unrelieved and repeated pain can have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Preterm and full-term neonates undergo many painful procedures during their hospitalization in the neonatal intensive care unit. Unrelieved and repeated pain can have important repercussions on their motor and intellectual development. Still, pain management interventions are limited for neonates.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of olfactive stimulation interventions on the pain response of preterm and full-term infants during painful procedures.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
An electronic search was conducted from inception to August 2019 in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Sciences, CENTRAL, Scopus and ProQuest.
REVIEW METHODS
Study selection, data extraction, assessment of risk of bias and quality of evidence were performed by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
3311 studies were screened. Of the 14 studies included studies (n = 1028 infants), results from 10 were combined in meta-analysis. The latter demonstrated that olfactive stimulation interventions using a familiar odor were effective compared to standard care on pain reactivity (SMD -0.69; 95% CI -0.93 to -0.44; I = 20%, p < 0.00001), pain regulation (SMD -0.40; 95% CI -0.66 to -0.14; I = 13%, p = 0.002), crying duration during (SMD -0.42; 95% CI -0.73 to -0.10; I = 47%, p = 0.009) and after the procedure (SMD -0.37; 95% CI -0.68 to -0.07; I = 0%, p = 0.01), heart rate after the procedure (MD -3.87; 95% CI -7.36 to -0.38; I = 99%, p = 0.03), oxygen saturation during (MD -0.47; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.08; I = 91%, p = 0.02) and after the procedure (MD -0.56; 95% CI -0.99 to -0.13; I = 99%, p = 0.01). No adverse event was reported.
CONCLUSION
These findings are based on low to very low quality of evidence limiting our confidence in effect estimates. More rigorous trials with a larger sample size are needed to enhance the comprehension of the mechanisms underlying olfactive stimulation interventions and the interventions' efficacy.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Pain; Pain Management; Pain, Procedural; Punctures
PubMed: 32738721
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103697 -
Physiology & Behavior Jan 2024Pregnancy is a transformative phase marked by significant behavioral and physiological changes. Substantial changes in pregnancy-related hormones are thought to induce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Pregnancy is a transformative phase marked by significant behavioral and physiological changes. Substantial changes in pregnancy-related hormones are thought to induce changes in chemosensory perception, as often observed in non-human animals. However, empirical behavioral research on pregnancy-related olfactory or gustatory changes has not yet reached a consensus. This PROSPERO pre-registered systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated published data of olfactory and gustatory changes in pregnant individuals, across the three pregnancy trimesters and postpartum period. Our comprehensive search strategy identified 20 relevant studies, for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that pregnant individuals, regardless of trimester, performed significantly poorer in terms of odour identification, however, no difference was detected between non-pregnant controls and women postpartum. Additionally, pregnant women in the second and third trimester rated olfactory stimuli to be more intense. A slight decline in odour pleasantness ratings was observed amongst those in the second trimester. No major difference was observed between pregnant and non-pregnant subjects in terms of gustatory functions, except the first trimester appeared to be associated with increased pleasantness for the sweet taste. Post-hoc meta-regression analyses revealed that pregnancy stage was a significant predictor for observed effect size for odour intensity ratings, but not for odour identification scores. These findings provide valuable insights into the interplay between pregnancy and chemosensory perception, highlighting systematic physiological changes due to pregnancy. Healthcare providers can also utilize the knowledge of sensory shifts to better support pregnant women in making appropriate dietary choices, managing sense-related discomfort, and leading to potential sensory interventions. Overall, this research enhances our comprehension of sensory shifts during pregnancy, benefiting maternal health and pregnancy-related care.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Postpartum Period; Smell; Taste Perception; Diet; Odorants
PubMed: 37890603
DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2023.114388 -
Annals of Epidemiology Sep 2023To complement conventional testing methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections, dogs' olfactory capability for true real-time detection... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To complement conventional testing methods for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections, dogs' olfactory capability for true real-time detection has been investigated worldwide. Diseases produce specific scents in affected individuals via volatile organic compounds. This systematic review evaluates the current evidence for canine olfaction as a reliable coronavirus disease 2019 screening tool.
METHODS
Two independent study quality assessment tools were used: the QUADAS-2 tool for the evaluation of laboratory tests' diagnostic accuracy, designed for systematic reviews, and a general evaluation tool for canine detection studies, adapted to medical detection. Various study design, sample, dog, and olfactory training features were considered as potential confounding factors.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies from 15 countries were evaluated. Respectively, four and six studies had a low risk of bias and high quality: the four QUADAS-2 nonbiased studies resulted in ranges of 81%-97% sensitivity and 91%-100% specificity. The six high-quality studies, according to the general evaluation system, revealed ranges of 82%-97% sensitivity and 83%-100% specificity. The other studies contained high bias risks and applicability and/or quality concerns.
CONCLUSIONS
Standardization and certification procedures as used for canine explosives detection are needed for medical detection dogs for the optimal and structured usage of their undoubtful potential.
Topics: Animals; Dogs; Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity and Specificity; Smell; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 37209927
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.05.002 -
The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and... Jul 2023Anosmia and hyposmia significantly affect patients' quality of life and have many etiologies, including trauma, inflammatory conditions including chronic rhinosinusitis,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anosmia and hyposmia significantly affect patients' quality of life and have many etiologies, including trauma, inflammatory conditions including chronic rhinosinusitis, neoplasm, and viral infections, such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2.
OBJECTIVE
Our purpose was to establish whether a consensus exists regarding optimal management of olfactory dysfunction and to provide insight into the treatment of anosmia in the current climate of increased prevalence secondary to COVID-19. Thus, we aimed to systematically review the literature on the management of non-Chronic-rhinosinusitis- related anosmia/hyposmia.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published since January 1990 using terms combined with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). We included articles evaluating management of anosmia and hyposmia written in the English language, with original data, a minimum of 3 months of follow-up except for COVID-related studies, at least 2 patients, and well-defined and measurable outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 3013 unique titles were returned upon the initial search. Of these, 297 abstracts were examined, yielding 19 full texts meeting inclusion criteria (8 with level 1 evidence, 3 with level 2, 1 with level 3, and 7 with level 4). The studies included a total of 1522 subjects, with follow up ranging from 3 to 72 months, with an exception for COVID related studies. Endpoints were based on clinically significant improvements of olfactory functions as measured through validated smell tests. Treatments with the most robust data were intranasal corticosteroids and olfactory training.
CONCLUSION
The literature on the treatment of anosmia and hyposmia includes randomized trials showing the efficacy of a few modalities. While further research is needed to expand therapeutic options for this debilitating condition, the current literature supports the use of olfactory training and topical corticosteroids.
Topics: Humans; Anosmia; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Olfaction Disorders; Quality of Life; Smell; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Sinusitis
PubMed: 35959948
DOI: 10.1177/00034894221118186 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Olfactory 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... (Review)
Review
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.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anosmia; COVID-19; Expectorants; Humans; Luteolin; Nasal Decongestants; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Smell
PubMed: 36062970
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013876.pub3 -
Journal of Complementary & Integrative... Jun 2023To provide a broad evaluation of the efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions for the management of sinusitis. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To provide a broad evaluation of the efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions for the management of sinusitis.
METHODS
Five electronic databases for published research articles, three databases for the dissertation/doctoral thesis works, clinical trial registries, and hand searches were done till May 2021. All comparative clinical trials recruiting sinusitis patients of any age group, receiving Ayurveda intervention, regardless of forms, dosages, and ingredients, for not less than one week were included. The data extraction and the risk of bias (RoB) assessment were done by two reviewers independently.
RESULTS
A total of 2,824 records were identified, of which 09 randomized parallel arms trials met inclusion criteria. No studies were found comparing Ayurveda vs. placebo or non-Ayurveda interventions. Combined Ayurveda therapy (CT) was statistically more beneficial compared with either procedural or non-procedural Ayurveda therapy alone in reducing symptoms nasal discharge (standardized MD -0.71, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.26, 58%, 210 participants) and headache (standardized MD -0.44, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.02, 56%, 218 participants), however, no significant difference was found in reducing symptoms nasal obstruction and loss of smell. No data related to the safety of Ayurveda intervention was found. All the trials (09) were having 'high' to 'some concern' overall bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Although individual studies appeared to produce positive results, very low certainty of total effect hindered to arrive at any conclusion regarding efficacy or safety of Ayurveda interventions for sinusitis. There is a need for well-designed-executed-reported clinical studies on clinically relevant outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION MUMBER
CRD42018103995.
PubMed: 34634197
DOI: 10.1515/jcim-2021-0390 -
The Journal of Laryngology and Otology Sep 2023Smell impairment affects 60-80 per cent of individuals aged over 80 years. This review aimed to identify any association between vitamin D deficiency and smell... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Smell impairment affects 60-80 per cent of individuals aged over 80 years. This review aimed to identify any association between vitamin D deficiency and smell impairment, and determine the efficacy of vitamin D to treat smell impairment.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted across four databases between the years 2000 and 2022. The literature screen was performed by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
Seven articles were included in this review. Four studies examined the association between vitamin D deficiency and smell impairment, with three studies identifying a significant relationship. Three studies investigated the use of vitamin D as treatment for smell impairment, which found complete resolution or significant symptom improvement after vitamin D deficiency was treated.
CONCLUSION
This review identified limited studies on this topic. As vitamin D supplementation is relatively cost-efficient, further large-scale studies should be carried out to investigate the efficacy of vitamin D for treating anosmia.
Topics: Humans; Aged, 80 and over; Vitamin D; Smell; Vitamins; Vitamin D Deficiency; Olfaction Disorders
PubMed: 36341550
DOI: 10.1017/S0022215122002389 -
BMC Neurology Mar 2021The spectrum of neurological involvement in COVID-19 is not thoroughly understood. To the best of our knowledge, no systematic review with meta-analysis and a sub-group... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The spectrum of neurological involvement in COVID-19 is not thoroughly understood. To the best of our knowledge, no systematic review with meta-analysis and a sub-group comparison between severe and non-severe cases has been published. The aim of this study is to assess the frequency of neurological manifestations and complications, identify the neurodiagnostic findings, and compare these aspects between severe and non-severe COVID-19 cases.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was conducted for studies published between the 1st of January 2020 and 22nd of April 2020. In addition, we scanned the bibliography of included studies to identify other potentially eligible studies. The criteria for eligibility included studies published in English language (or translated to English), those involving patients with COVID-19 of all age groups, and reporting neurological findings. Data were extracted from eligible studies. Meta-analyses were conducted using comprehensive meta-analysis software. Random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled percentages and means with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the effect of individual studies on the summary estimate. A subgroup analysis was conducted according to severity. The main outcomes of the study were to identify the frequency and nature of neurological manifestations and complications, and the neuro-diagnostic findings in COVID-19 patients.
RESULTS
44 articles were included with a pooled sample size of 13,480 patients. The mean age was 50.3 years and 53% were males. The most common neurological manifestations were: Myalgia (22.2, 95% CI, 17.2 to 28.1%), taste impairment (19.6, 95% CI, 3.8 to 60.1%), smell impairment (18.3, 95% CI, 15.4 to 76.2%), headache (12.1, 95% CI, 9.1 to 15.8%), dizziness (11.3, 95% CI, 8.5 to 15.0%), and encephalopathy (9.4, 95% CI, 2.8 to 26.6%). Nearly 2.5% (95% CI, 1 to 6.1%) of patients had acute cerebrovascular diseases (CVD). Myalgia, elevated CK and LDH, and acute CVD were significantly more common in severe cases. Moreover, 20 case reports were assessed qualitatively, and their data presented separately.
CONCLUSIONS
Neurological involvement is common in COVID-19 patients. Early recognition and vigilance of such involvement might impact their overall outcomes.
Topics: Brain Diseases; COVID-19; Humans; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33784985
DOI: 10.1186/s12883-021-02161-4