-
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Oct 2023The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a respiratory infection that has spread worldwide and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a respiratory infection that has spread worldwide and is responsible for a high death toll. Although respiratory symptoms are the most common, there is growing evidence that oral signs of COVID-19 can also be seen in children. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the available data on the oral manifestations of COVID-19 in children and to recommend appropriate methods of diagnosis and treatment.
METHODS
A systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was done to discover relevant papers published between their establishment and January 2023. Articles detailing oral symptoms in pediatric patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection were included, and data on clinical characteristics, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes were extracted and evaluated.
RESULTS
A total of 24 studies involving 2112 pediatric patients with COVID-19 were included in the review. The most common presentations are oral lesions, taste and smell disorders, oral candidiasis, hemorrhagic crust, tongue discoloration, lip and tongue fissuring, gingivitis, and salivary gland inflammation. These manifestations were sometimes associated with multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) or Kawasaki disease (KD). Management strategies varied depending on the severity of the oral manifestation and ranged from symptomatic relief with topical analgesics to systemic medications.
CONCLUSION
Oral symptoms of COVID-19 are relatively prevalent in juvenile patients and can be accompanied by severe systemic diseases, such as MIS-C or Kawasaki illness. Early detection and adequate care of these oral symptoms are critical for the best patient results. Understanding the underlying pathophysiology and developing targeted treatments requires more investigation.
Topics: Child; Humans; COVID-19; Databases, Factual; SARS-CoV-2; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 37602892
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.776 -
Journal of Taibah University Medical... Apr 2022Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction (OGD) are important early clinical symptoms of COVID-19. We aim to calculate the pooled prevalence of these symptoms and discuss the... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction (OGD) are important early clinical symptoms of COVID-19. We aim to calculate the pooled prevalence of these symptoms and discuss the likely implications on clinical practice such as their use as screening tools and potential prognosis indicators.
METHODS
Using a combination of keywords and medical subject headings, we searched for observational studies in the following five databases: Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Two authors independently screened and selected the final articles according to the inclusion criteria. Two investigators independently assessed the risk of bias in individual studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also assessed. The reported outcome of the pooled analysis was the prevalence of OGD calculated using a random-effect model. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to report results.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies with a total sample size of 4149 were included in this meta-analysis. Out of these, 2106 and 2676 patients reported some degree of olfactory and/or gustatory dysfunction with COVID-19, respectively. The reported outcomes were in terms of pooled prevalence, with gustatory dysfunction being 57.33% and olfactory dysfunction being 59.69%, a significantly high occurrence.
CONCLUSION
There is a high occurrence of smell and taste impairment in COVID-19. Given the lack of objective testing for detecting OGD in most studies, the high prevalence found is likely to be an underestimation of the true prevalence. This implies that physicians must use them as reliable early indicators of COVID-19 and employ them before using expensive tests.
PubMed: 34803567
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtumed.2021.10.009 -
International Archives of... Jan 2018In Brazil, estimates show that 14.7% of the adult population smokes, and changes in smell and taste arising from tobacco consumption are largely present in this... (Review)
Review
In Brazil, estimates show that 14.7% of the adult population smokes, and changes in smell and taste arising from tobacco consumption are largely present in this population, which is an aggravating factor to these dysfunctions. The objective of this study is to systematically review the findings in the literature about the influence of smoking on smell and taste. Our research covered articles published from January 1980 to August 2014 in the following databases: MEDLINE (accessed through PubMed), LILACS, Cochrane Library, and SciELO. We conducted separate lines of research: one concerning smell and the other, taste. We analyzed all the articles that presented randomized controlled studies involving the relation between smoking and smell and taste. Articles that presented unclear methodologies and those whose main results did not target the smell or taste of the subjects were excluded. Titles and abstracts of the articles identified by the research strategy were evaluated by researchers. We included four studies, two of which were exclusively about smell: the first noted the relation between the perception of puff strength and nicotine content; the second did not find any differences in the thresholds and discriminative capacity between smokers and nonsmokers. One article considered only taste and supports the relation between smoking and flavor, another considered both sensory modalities and observes positive results toward the relation immediately after smoking cessation. Three of the four studies presented positive results for the researched variables.
PubMed: 29371903
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1597921 -
International Journal of Preventive... 2021Evidence showed that partial or complete loss of smell and taste might be a possible primary symptom of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19). This study aimed to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Evidence showed that partial or complete loss of smell and taste might be a possible primary symptom of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19). This study aimed to systematically review and pool all available evidence on the olfactory and gustatory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients.
METHODS
In this systematic review, a comprehensive search was carried out systematically through e-databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS); that was limited to English-language studies published from 2019 up to 6 May 2020. Afterward, all studies reported the taste and smell dysfunction in the COVID-19 patients were included. The quality of the studies was assessed by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The pooled prevalence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction was estimated using the random effects meta-analysis method.
RESULTS
Among 28 eligible included studies in this systematic review, finally, 22 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. According to the random effect meta-analysis, the global pooled prevalence (95% confidence interval) of any olfactory dysfunction, anosmia, and hyposmia was 55% (40%-70%), 40% (22%-57%), and 40% (20%-61%) respectively. The pooled estimated prevalence of any gustatory dysfunction, ageusia, and dysgeusia was 41% (23%-59%), 31% (3%-59%), and 34% (19%-48%) respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Olfactory and gustatory dysfunction is prevalent among COVID-19 patients. Therefore, olfactory and gustatory dysfunction seems to be part of important symptoms and notify for the diagnosis of COVID-19, especially in the early phase of the infection.
PubMed: 35070203
DOI: 10.4103/ijpvm.IJPVM_484_20 -
European Archives of... Jan 2022A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the prevalence and prognosis of otorhinolaryngological symptoms in patients with the diagnosed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the prevalence and prognosis of otorhinolaryngological symptoms in patients with the diagnosed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was performed up to August 19, 2020.We included studies that reported infections with COVID-19 and symptoms of otolaryngology. The retrieved data from the respective studies were evaluated and summarized. The study's immediate result was to assess the combined prevalence of otorhinolaryngological symptoms in patients with COVID-19. However, the secondary result was to determine the exacerbation of COVID-19 infection in patients with otorhinolaryngological symptoms.
RESULTS
Fifty-four studies with 16,478 patients were included. Olfactory dysfunction, sneezing and sputum production were the 3 most prevalent otorhinolaryngological symptoms in patients with COVID-19. The pooled prevalence amongst the prevalent symptoms was 47% (95% CI 29-65; range 0-98; I = 99.58%), 27% (95% CI 11-48; range 12-40; I = 93.34%), and 22% (95% CI 16-30; range 2-56; I = 97.60%), respectively. The proportion of severely ill patients with sputum production and shortness of breath was significantly higher among patients with COVID-19 infections (OR 1.66 [95% CI 1.08-2.54]; P = 0.02, I = 51% and 3.29 [95% CI 1.57-6.90]; P = 0.002, I = 49%, respectively). Subgroup analysis showed no statistically significant differences between the incidence of otolaryngology symptoms in severely ill patients and non-severely ill patients (OR 1.43 [95% CI 1.12-1.82]; P = 0.07 I = 53.1%). In contrast, the incidence of shortness of breath in severely ill patients was significantly increased (3.29 [1.57-6.90]; P = 0.002, I = 49%).
CONCLUSION
Our research shows that otorhinolaryngology symptoms in patients with COVID-19 are not uncommon, which should attract otorhinolaryngologists' attention.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Prevalence; Prognosis; SARS-CoV-2; Smell
PubMed: 34032909
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-06900-8 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Dec 2015Olfactory dysfunction is a key symptom in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). Despite the implications for quality of life, relatively few articles have tested... (Review)
Review
Olfactory dysfunction is a key symptom in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR). Despite the implications for quality of life, relatively few articles have tested olfactory function in their investigations. The current systematic review aimed to investigate the following 2 questions: (1) What does AR do to human olfaction? (2) How effective is the treatment of AR in restoring the sense of smell? A comprehensive literature search was performed, and human studies of any design were included. A total of 420 articles were identified, and 36 articles were considered relevant. Data indicate that the frequency of olfactory dysfunction increases with the duration of the disorder, and most studies report a frequency in the range of 20% to 40%. Although olfactory dysfunction does not appear to be very severe in patients with AR, its presence seems to increase with the severity of the disease. There is very limited evidence that antihistamines improve olfactory function. In addition, there is limited evidence that topical steroids improve the sense of smell, especially in patients with seasonal AR. This is also the case for specific immunotherapy. However, many questions remain unanswered because randomized controlled trials are infrequent and only a few studies rely on quantitative measurement of olfactory function.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Rhinitis, Allergic; Smell
PubMed: 26409662
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2015.08.003 -
Rhinology Jun 2022Whether endoscopic surgery for sellar/parasellar disease causes significant deficits in olfactory function remains unclear. We aimed to systematically review the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Whether endoscopic surgery for sellar/parasellar disease causes significant deficits in olfactory function remains unclear. We aimed to systematically review the olfactory outcomes in such settings based on the evidence up to date.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched through February 1, 2021. Included studies were limited to endoscopic surgery for sellar/parasellar disease with follow-up olfactory function measured by standardized olfactory testing methods or subjective assessment. The primary outcome was the change in olfactory function after surgery assessed by standardized olfactory testing methods. The secondary outcome was the change in subjective olfactory function. Random-effects model was used in obtaining combine effects. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastleâ€"Ottawa scale. Sensitivity analysis was carried out using the leave-one-out approach, and publication bias was assessed using Egger's test.
RESULTS
The results show no significant difference in olfaction assessed by standardized olfactory testing methods at 1-3 months post-surgery (880 patients in 16 studies) or at 6-12 months post-surgery (1320 patients in 16 studies) compared to pre-surgery, whereas a significantly lower subjective olfaction at 3 months was observed. In addition, the lack of significant change in olfaction as assessed by standardized olfactory testing methods was observed regardless of whether patients were treated with or without the nasoseptal flap (NSF) harvesting. Heterogeneity and publication bias were observed, whereas sensitivity analysis showed the meta-analysis results are robust.
CONCLUSION
The findings of this updated systematic review and meta-analysis support the conclusion that endoscopic surgery for sellar and parasellar pathology may pose no greater risk of olfactory dysfunction. In addition, the current evidence does not support there is an increased risk of diminished olfaction among patients treated with NSF during surgery.
Topics: Humans; Smell; Olfaction Disorders; Treatment Outcome; Endoscopy; Surgical Flaps
PubMed: 35233583
DOI: 10.4193/Rhin21.348 -
European Journal of Orthodontics Jan 2022Intraoral scanners have become an increasingly popular alternative to conventional impression methods. Although their accuracy and validity have been examined...
BACKGROUND
Intraoral scanners have become an increasingly popular alternative to conventional impression methods. Although their accuracy and validity have been examined thoroughly, patient-reported information including experiences, preferences, and satisfaction has not yet been investigated in a systematic way.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this systematic review is to investigate the available data and appraise the evidence on patient-reported experiences and preferences following impression taking with intraoral scanners.
SEARCH METHODS
Unrestricted search of seven databases (Pubmed, CENTRAL, Cochrane reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, Clinical Trials, and ProQuest) and grey literature were conducted until October 2020. Detailed search strategies were developed for each database.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies involving individuals of any gender or age, subjected to full arch impression taking with conventional and intraoral scanning methods were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Following the retrieval and selection of the studies, data extraction was performed. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools.
RESULTS
From the initially identified records, nine studies [eight crossover (two of them randomized) and one parallel group] were eventually included in the present systematic review. Randomized studies were shown, overall, to have some concerns regarding bias, whereas the non-randomized studies were found to be at serious risk, mainly because of bias due to confounding. All studies demonstrated some benefit in favour of intraoral scanning compared with conventional techniques. More positive feelings were generally observed with the intraoral scanners regarding smell, taste, sound, vibration, nausea, and queasiness. Overall, comfort assessment mostly favoured digital methods. No differences were found concerning the level of anxiety between the two methods. Among the included studies, time perception was a parameter leading to contradictory results.
LIMITATIONS
These emerge due to the nature and characteristics of the information retrieved from the included studies. The validation of the instruments to capture patient-reported outcomes needs to be further elaborated.
CONCLUSIONS
Intraoral scanners seem to be a promising new asset in the orthodontic office from the perspective of individuals' experiences and preferences. Nevertheless, to investigate patient-reported outcomes correctly, further high-quality studies are required in the future.
REGISTRATION
Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ayug2/).
Topics: Bibliometrics; Humans; Patient Reported Outcome Measures
PubMed: 34089258
DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjab027 -
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 -
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