-
Narra J Dec 2021This study was conducted to determine the prevalence of prolonged neuromuscular symptoms, including fatigue, anosmia, headache, myalgia, and joint pain in COVID-19...
This study was conducted to determine the prevalence of prolonged neuromuscular symptoms, including fatigue, anosmia, headache, myalgia, and joint pain in COVID-19 survivors hospitalized with mild, moderate, or severe infections worldwide. The search was conducted up to January 30th, 2021 using three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) to identify potentially eligible studies. Data on study characteristics, follow-up characteristics, and severity of COVID-19 during hospitalization were collected in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of relevant articles. The estimated prevalence of specific prolonged neuromuscular symptoms and the association between COVID-19 severity and occurrence of prolonged neuromuscular symptoms was analyzed wherever appropriate. Database search yielded 4,050 articles and 22 articles were included for meta-analysis. The estimated prevalence of prolonged fatigue was recorded in 21.2% (95%CI: 11.9%- 34.8%) of 3,730 COVID-19 survivors. Persistent anosmia was recorded in 239 of 2,600 COVID-19 survivors (9.7%, 95%CI: 6.1%-15.2%). In 84 out of 2,412 COVID-19 survivors (8.9%, 95%CI: 3.2%-22.6%), prolonged headache was observed. A total of 53 out of 1,125 COVID-19 patients (5.6%, 95%CI: 2.1%-14.2%) complained of persistent myalgia even after being discharged from the hospital. The prevalence of prolonged joint pain was in 15.4% (95%CI: 8.2%-27.2%) of subjects. Due to data scarcity on COVID-19 severity and prolonged neuromuscular symptoms, association analysis could not be conducted. Widespread concern regarding long-term impacts of COVID-19 was raised after several studies reported prolonged symptoms in COVID-19 survivors. Numerous theories have been proposed to address this concern; however, as the research on this pandemic is still ongoing, no explanation is definitive yet. Therefore, follow-up studies in COVID-19 survivors after recovery from COVID-19 are warranted to determine the pathogenesis of prolonged symptoms. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021242332.
PubMed: 38450213
DOI: 10.52225/narra.v1i3.48 -
The British Journal of General Practice... Aug 2022Antibiotics are overused in patients with acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) as it is difficult to identify those who benefit from antibiotic treatment. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Antibiotics are overused in patients with acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) as it is difficult to identify those who benefit from antibiotic treatment.
AIM
To develop prediction models for computed tomography (CT)-confirmed ARS and culture-confirmed acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) in adults presenting to primary care with symptoms suggestive of ARS.
DESIGN AND SETTING
This was a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.
METHOD
CT-confirmed ARS was defined as the presence of fluid level or total opacification in any maxillary sinuses, whereas culture-confirmed ABRS was defined by culture of fluid from antral puncture. Prediction models were derived using logistic regression modelling.
RESULTS
Among 426 patients from three studies, 140 patients (32.9%) had CT-confirmed ARS. A model consisting of seven variables: previous diagnosis of ARS, preceding upper respiratory tract infection, anosmia, double sickening, purulent nasal discharge on examination, need for antibiotics as judged by a physician, and C-reactive protein (CRP) showed an optimism-corrected c-statistic of 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.69 to 0.78) and a calibration slope of 0.99 (95% CI = 0.72 to 1.19). Among 225 patients from two studies, 68 patients (30.2%) had culture-confirmed ABRS. A model consisting of three variables: pain in teeth, purulent nasal discharge, and CRP showed an optimism-corrected c-statistic of 0.70 (95% CI = 0.63 to 0.77) and a calibration slope of 1.00 (95% CI = 0.66 to 1.52). Clinical utility analysis showed that both models could be useful to rule out the target condition.
CONCLUSION
Simple prediction models for CT-confirmed ARS and culture-confirmed ABRS can be useful to safely reduce antibiotic use in adults with ARS in high-prescribing countries.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; C-Reactive Protein; Humans; Primary Health Care; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 35817585
DOI: 10.3399/BJGP.2021.0585 -
Medicine Oct 2023Hashimoto's thyroiditis (HT) is a common autoimmune disease. However, its presentation and management in the context of COVID-19 are unclear, and COVID-19-triggered HT,...
RATIONALE
Hashimoto's thyroiditis (HT) is a common autoimmune disease. However, its presentation and management in the context of COVID-19 are unclear, and COVID-19-triggered HT, along with myopathy and persistent creatine kinase (CK) levels, have not been previously reported. Moreover, no literature review is currently available on HT in the context of COVID-19. This study is a case report and systematic review of the literature.
PATIENT CONCERNS
A 33-year-old man was admitted with acute-onset myalgia, anosmia, loss of taste, fever, and upper respiratory tract symptoms.
DIAGNOSES
He was diagnosed with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) during hospitalization and had abnormal CK levels. The elevated CK level persisted even after the resolution of COVID-19. After excluding myopathies and cardiac factors, HT was diagnosed.
INTERVENTIONS
CK levels did not decrease appreciably until 14 d after levothyroxine administration.
OUTCOMES
The patient was discharged from the hospital in good health. In the systematic literature review, 7 case reports on COVID-19-associated HT were observed, although no incidence of associated myopathy or persistent elevation of CK was noted.
LESSONS
This case report highlights the potential link between COVID-19 and autoimmune thyroid diseases. In particular, this study underscores the significance of recognizing new-onset autoimmune thyroid disease in COVID-19-positive patients with elevated CK levels that cannot be attributed to other factors. This systematic review offers additional perspectives for diagnosing and managing HT in COVID-19 settings. Overall, the findings of this study could have important clinical implications for the care of COVID-19 patients, as early identification and treatment of autoimmune thyroid disease could help prevent long-term complications. Additional research is essential to elucidate the fundamental correlations between COVID-19 and HT and assess the effectiveness of therapeutic approaches for autoimmune thyroid conditions related to COVID-19.
Topics: Male; Humans; Adult; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Hashimoto Disease; Autoimmune Diseases; Myalgia
PubMed: 37861476
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035720 -
Journal of Global Health Dec 2020It is of paramount importance to understand the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools, which could support the decision-making about educational facilities closure or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
It is of paramount importance to understand the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools, which could support the decision-making about educational facilities closure or re-opening with effective prevention and control measures in place.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the extent of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in schools. We performed risk of bias evaluation of all included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).
RESULTS
2178 articles were retrieved and 11 studies were included. Five cohort studies reported a combined 22 student and 21 staff index cases that exposed 3345 contacts with 18 transmissions (overall infection attack rate (IAR): 0.08%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.00%-0.86%). IARs for students and school staff were 0.15% (95% CI = 0.00%-0.93%) and 0.70% (95% CI = 0.00%-3.56%) respectively. Six cross-sectional studies reported 639 SARS-CoV-2 positive cases in 6682 study participants tested [overall SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate: 8.00% (95% CI = 2.17%-16.95%). SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate was estimated to be 8.74% (95% CI = 2.34%-18.53%) among students, compared to 13.68% (95% CI = 1.68%-33.89%) among school staff. Gender differences were not found for secondary infection (OR = 1.44, 95% CI = 0.50-4.14, = 0.49) and SARS-CoV-2 positivity (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.72-1.13, = 0.36) in schools. Fever, cough, dyspnea, ageusia, anosmia, rhinitis, sore throat, headache, myalgia, asthenia, and diarrhoea were all associated with the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (based on two studies). Overall, study quality was judged to be poor with risk of performance and attrition bias, limiting the confidence in the results.
CONCLUSIONS
There is limited high-quality evidence available to quantify the extent of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in schools or to compare it to community transmission. Emerging evidence suggests lower IAR and SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate in students compared to school staff. Future prospective and adequately controlled cohort studies are necessary to confirm this finding.
Topics: Adolescent; COVID-19; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Disease Transmission, Infectious; Female; Humans; Male; SARS-CoV-2; Schools; Students
PubMed: 33437465
DOI: 10.7189/jogh.10.021104 -
ACS Chemical Neuroscience Oct 2020A significant proportion of people who test positive for COVID-19 have chemosensory deficits. However, the reported prevalence of these deficits in smell and taste... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A significant proportion of people who test positive for COVID-19 have chemosensory deficits. However, the reported prevalence of these deficits in smell and taste varies widely, and the reason for the differences between studies is unclear. We determined the pooled prevalence of such chemosensory deficits in a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched the COVID-19 portfolio of the National Institutes of Health for studies that reported the prevalence of smell or taste deficits or both in patients diagnosed with COVID-19. One-hundred-four studies reporting on 38 198 patients qualified and were subjected to a systematic review and meta-analysis. Estimated random prevalence of olfactory dysfunction was 43.0%, that of taste dysfunction was 44.6%, and that of overall chemosensory dysfunction was 47.4%. We examined the effects of age, gender, disease severity, and ethnicity on chemosensory dysfunction. Prevalence of smell or taste dysfunction or both decreased with older age, male gender, and disease severity. Ethnicity was highly significant: Caucasians had a three times higher prevalence of chemosensory dysfunctions (54.8%) than Asians (17.7%). The finding of geographic differences points to two causes that are not mutually exclusive. A virus mutation (D614G) may cause differing infectivity, while at the host level genetic, ethnicity-specific variants of the virus-binding entry proteins may facilitate virus entry in the olfactory epithelium and taste buds. Both explanations have major implications for infectivity, diagnosis, and management of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Topics: Age Factors; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2; Asian People; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Ethnicity; Genetic Variation; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; Pandemics; Peptidyl-Dipeptidase A; Pneumonia, Viral; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2; Serine Endopeptidases; Severity of Illness Index; Sex Factors; White People
PubMed: 32870641
DOI: 10.1021/acschemneuro.0c00460 -
Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery Aug 2021We reviewed the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function due to COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion.
OBJECTIVE
We reviewed the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function due to COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of Medline and Embase to identify publications that described at least one patient with COVID-19 who had altered olfactory/gustatory function and had CSF testing performed. The search ranged from December 1, 2019 to November 18, 2020.
RESULTS
We identified 51 publications that described 70 patients who met inclusion criteria. Of 51 patients who had CSF SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing, 3 (6%) patients had positive results and 1 (2%) patient had indeterminate results. Cycle threshold (Ct; the number of amplification cycles required for the target gene to exceed the threshold, which is inversely related to viral load) was not provided for the patients with a positive PCR. The patient with indeterminate results had a Ct of 37 initially, then no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on repeat testing. Of 6 patients who had CSF SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing, 3 (50%) were positive. Testing to distinguish intrathecal antibody synthesis from transudation of antibodies to the CSF via breakdown of the blood-brain barrier was performed in 1/3 (33%) patients; this demonstrated antibody transmission to the CSF via transudation.
CONCLUSION
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in CSF via PCR or evaluation for intrathecal antibody synthesis appears to be rare in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function. While pathology studies are needed, our review suggests it is unlikely that these symptoms are related to viral neuroinvasion.
Topics: Biomarkers; COVID-19; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; Taste Disorders
PubMed: 34146842
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2021.106760 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022COVID-19 illness is highly variable, ranging from infection with no symptoms through to pneumonia and life-threatening consequences. Symptoms such as fever, cough, or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 illness is highly variable, ranging from infection with no symptoms through to pneumonia and life-threatening consequences. Symptoms such as fever, cough, or loss of sense of smell (anosmia) or taste (ageusia), can help flag early on if the disease is present. Such information could be used either to rule out COVID-19 disease, or to identify people who need to go for COVID-19 diagnostic tests. This is the second update of this review, which was first published in 2020.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms to determine if a person presenting in primary care or to hospital outpatient settings, such as the emergency department or dedicated COVID-19 clinics, has COVID-19.
SEARCH METHODS
We undertook electronic searches up to 10 June 2021 in the University of Bern living search database. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We used artificial intelligence text analysis to conduct an initial classification of documents. We did not apply any language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies were eligible if they included people with clinically suspected COVID-19, or recruited known cases with COVID-19 and also controls without COVID-19 from a single-gate cohort. Studies were eligible when they recruited people presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings. Studies that included people who contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection while admitted to hospital were not eligible. The minimum eligible sample size of studies was 10 participants. All signs and symptoms were eligible for this review, including individual signs and symptoms or combinations. We accepted a range of reference standards.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Pairs of review authors independently selected all studies, at both title and abstract, and full-text stage. They resolved any disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 checklist, and resolved disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Analyses were restricted to prospective studies only. We presented sensitivity and specificity in paired forest plots, in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) space and in dumbbell plots. We estimated summary parameters using a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis whenever five or more primary prospective studies were available, and whenever heterogeneity across studies was deemed acceptable.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 90 studies; for this update we focused on the results of 42 prospective studies with 52,608 participants. Prevalence of COVID-19 disease varied from 3.7% to 60.6% with a median of 27.4%. Thirty-five studies were set in emergency departments or outpatient test centres (46,878 participants), three in primary care settings (1230 participants), two in a mixed population of in- and outpatients in a paediatric hospital setting (493 participants), and two overlapping studies in nursing homes (4007 participants). The studies did not clearly distinguish mild COVID-19 disease from COVID-19 pneumonia, so we present the results for both conditions together. Twelve studies had a high risk of bias for selection of participants because they used a high level of preselection to decide whether reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing was needed, or because they enrolled a non-consecutive sample, or because they excluded individuals while they were part of the study base. We rated 36 of the 42 studies as high risk of bias for the index tests because there was little or no detail on how, by whom and when, the symptoms were measured. For most studies, eligibility for testing was dependent on the local case definition and testing criteria that were in effect at the time of the study, meaning most people who were included in studies had already been referred to health services based on the symptoms that we are evaluating in this review. The applicability of the results of this review iteration improved in comparison with the previous reviews. This version has more studies of people presenting to ambulatory settings, which is where the majority of assessments for COVID-19 take place. Only three studies presented any data on children separately, and only one focused specifically on older adults. We found data on 96 symptoms or combinations of signs and symptoms. Evidence on individual signs as diagnostic tests was rarely reported, so this review reports mainly on the diagnostic value of symptoms. Results were highly variable across studies. Most had very low sensitivity and high specificity. RT-PCR was the most often used reference standard (40/42 studies). Only cough (11 studies) had a summary sensitivity above 50% (62.4%, 95% CI 50.6% to 72.9%)); its specificity was low (45.4%, 95% CI 33.5% to 57.9%)). Presence of fever had a sensitivity of 37.6% (95% CI 23.4% to 54.3%) and a specificity of 75.2% (95% CI 56.3% to 87.8%). The summary positive likelihood ratio of cough was 1.14 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.25) and that of fever 1.52 (95% CI 1.10 to 2.10). Sore throat had a summary positive likelihood ratio of 0.814 (95% CI 0.714 to 0.929), which means that its presence increases the probability of having an infectious disease other than COVID-19. Dyspnoea (12 studies) and fatigue (8 studies) had a sensitivity of 23.3% (95% CI 16.4% to 31.9%) and 40.2% (95% CI 19.4% to 65.1%) respectively. Their specificity was 75.7% (95% CI 65.2% to 83.9%) and 73.6% (95% CI 48.4% to 89.3%). The summary positive likelihood ratio of dyspnoea was 0.96 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.11) and that of fatigue 1.52 (95% CI 1.21 to 1.91), which means that the presence of fatigue slightly increases the probability of having COVID-19. Anosmia alone (7 studies), ageusia alone (5 studies), and anosmia or ageusia (6 studies) had summary sensitivities below 50% but summary specificities over 90%. Anosmia had a summary sensitivity of 26.4% (95% CI 13.8% to 44.6%) and a specificity of 94.2% (95% CI 90.6% to 96.5%). Ageusia had a summary sensitivity of 23.2% (95% CI 10.6% to 43.3%) and a specificity of 92.6% (95% CI 83.1% to 97.0%). Anosmia or ageusia had a summary sensitivity of 39.2% (95% CI 26.5% to 53.6%) and a specificity of 92.1% (95% CI 84.5% to 96.2%). The summary positive likelihood ratios of anosmia alone and anosmia or ageusia were 4.55 (95% CI 3.46 to 5.97) and 4.99 (95% CI 3.22 to 7.75) respectively, which is just below our arbitrary definition of a 'red flag', that is, a positive likelihood ratio of at least 5. The summary positive likelihood ratio of ageusia alone was 3.14 (95% CI 1.79 to 5.51). Twenty-four studies assessed combinations of different signs and symptoms, mostly combining olfactory symptoms. By combining symptoms with other information such as contact or travel history, age, gender, and a local recent case detection rate, some multivariable prediction scores reached a sensitivity as high as 90%.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Most individual symptoms included in this review have poor diagnostic accuracy. Neither absence nor presence of symptoms are accurate enough to rule in or rule out the disease. The presence of anosmia or ageusia may be useful as a red flag for the presence of COVID-19. The presence of cough also supports further testing. There is currently no evidence to support further testing with PCR in any individuals presenting only with upper respiratory symptoms such as sore throat, coryza or rhinorrhoea. Combinations of symptoms with other readily available information such as contact or travel history, or the local recent case detection rate may prove more useful and should be further investigated in an unselected population presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings. The diagnostic accuracy of symptoms for COVID-19 is moderate to low and any testing strategy using symptoms as selection mechanism will result in both large numbers of missed cases and large numbers of people requiring testing. Which one of these is minimised, is determined by the goal of COVID-19 testing strategies, that is, controlling the epidemic by isolating every possible case versus identifying those with clinically important disease so that they can be monitored or treated to optimise their prognosis. The former will require a testing strategy that uses very few symptoms as entry criterion for testing, the latter could focus on more specific symptoms such as fever and anosmia.
Topics: Aged; Ageusia; Anosmia; Artificial Intelligence; COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; Child; Cough; Dyspnea; Fatigue; Fever; Hospitals; Humans; Outpatients; Pharyngitis; Primary Health Care; Prospective Studies; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 35593186
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013665.pub3 -
Drug Discoveries & Therapeutics Jan 2021The novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified in 2019 in Wuhan, China. Clinically, respiratory tract symptoms as...
The novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified in 2019 in Wuhan, China. Clinically, respiratory tract symptoms as well as other organs disorders are observed in patients positively diagnosed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In addition, neurological symptoms, mainly anosmia, ageusia and headache were observed in many patients. Once in the central nervous system (CNS), the SARS-CoV-2 can reside either in a quiescent latent state, or eventually in actively state leading to severe acute encephalitis, characterized by neuroinflammation and prolonged neuroimmune activation. SRAS-CoV-2 requires angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as a cell entry receptor. The expression of this receptor in endothelial cells of blood-brain barrier (BBB) shows that SRAS-CoV-2 may have higher neuroinvasive potential compared to known coronaviruses. This review summarizes available information regarding the impact of SRAS-CoV-2 in the brain and tended to identify its potential pathways of neuroinvasion. We offer also an understanding of the long-term impact of latently form of SARS-CoV-2 on the development of neurodegenerative disorders. As a conclusion, the persistent infection of SRAS-CoV-2 in the brain could be involved on human neurodegenerative diseases that evolve a gradual process, perhapes, over several decades.
Topics: Animals; COVID-19; Central Nervous System Viral Diseases; Host-Pathogen Interactions; Humans; Neurodegenerative Diseases; Neurons; SARS-CoV-2; Viral Tropism; Virus Latency
PubMed: 33390561
DOI: 10.5582/ddt.2020.03106 -
Chemical Senses Dec 2020Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has currently infected over 6.5 million people worldwide.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Objective Sensory Testing Methods Reveal a Higher Prevalence of Olfactory Loss in COVID-19-Positive Patients Compared to Subjective Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has currently infected over 6.5 million people worldwide. In response to the pandemic, numerous studies have tried to identify the causes and symptoms of the disease. Emerging evidence supports recently acquired anosmia (complete loss of smell) and hyposmia (partial loss of smell) as symptoms of COVID-19, but studies of olfactory dysfunction show a wide range of prevalence from 5% to 98%. We undertook a search of Pubmed/Medline and Google Scholar with the keywords "COVID-19," "smell," and/or "olfaction." We included any study that quantified smell loss (anosmia and hyposmia) as a symptom of COVID-19. Studies were grouped and compared based on the type of method used to measure smell loss-subjective measures, such as self-reported smell loss, versus objective measures using rated stimuli-to determine if prevalence differed by method type. For each study, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated from point estimates of olfactory disturbances. We identified 34 articles quantifying anosmia as a symptom of COVID-19 (6 objective and 28 subjective), collected from cases identified from January 16 to April 30, 2020. The pooled prevalence estimate of smell loss was 77% when assessed through objective measurements (95% CI of 61.4-89.2%) and 44% with subjective measurements (95% CI of 32.2-57.0%). Objective measures are a more sensitive method to identify smell loss as a result of infection with SARS-CoV-2; the use of subjective measures, while expedient during the early stages of the pandemic, underestimates the true prevalence of smell loss.
Topics: Anosmia; COVID-19; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; Prevalence; Risk Factors; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33245136
DOI: 10.1093/chemse/bjaa064 -
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and... Jun 2023Different modalities of treatment have been suggested in the treatment for post COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction (OD). Starting with lifestyle modification, smoking...
PURPOSE
Different modalities of treatment have been suggested in the treatment for post COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction (OD). Starting with lifestyle modification, smoking cessation, for example, was shown to improve the symptoms for patients with OD. Intranasal and oral corticosteroids have been described in the literature for the treatment of OD. In this review, we are looking at a novel intervention using platelet-rich plasma injection into the nasal cleft for treatment of post COVID-19 infection olfactory dysfunction.
METHODS
A literature search was done using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Guidelines, the databases of PMC, Medline, CINAHL, Wiley online library were searched from their year of inception until February 2023. Search terms were used and included a combination of the following keywords; "platelet-rich plasma", "platelet rich plasma", "PRP", "Anosmia", "olfactory dysfunction" and "COVID".
RESULTS
The four studies in this review included a total of 238 adult patients who presented with olfactory dysfunction. The studies were heterogenic in terms of follow up period which was not long enough through all the included studies. Additionally, different protocol of injecting was seen in different studies.
CONCLUSION
Injecting PRP for treatment of COVID-19 induced olfactory dysfunction is a safe technique with what seems like promising initial results with low complication rate. However, there are not enough studies assessing its effectiveness compared to other treatment modalities. Further randomized controlled trials with shared protocol are needed to establish further understanding of its role in treatment of COVID-19 induced OD.
PubMed: 37362129
DOI: 10.1007/s12070-023-03938-4