-
The Laryngoscope Jun 2022Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common presenting symptom of COVID-19 infection. Radiological imaging of the olfactory structures in patients with COVID-19 and OD can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common presenting symptom of COVID-19 infection. Radiological imaging of the olfactory structures in patients with COVID-19 and OD can potentially shed light on its pathogenesis, and guide clinicians in prognostication and intervention.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, SCOPUS were searched from inception to August 1, 2021. Three reviewers selected observational studies, case series, and case reports reporting radiological changes in the olfactory structures, detected on magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, or other imaging modalities, in patients aged ≥18 years with COVID-19 infection and OD, following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and a PROSPERO-registered protocol (CRD42021275211). We described the proportion of radiological outcomes, and used random-effects meta-analyses to pool the prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification, olfactory bulb signal abnormalities, and olfactory mucosa abnormalities in patients with and without COVID-19-associated OD.
RESULTS
We included 7 case-control studies (N = 353), 11 case series (N = 154), and 12 case reports (N = 12). The pooled prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification in patients with COVID-19 infection and OD (63%, 95% CI = 0.38-0.82) was significantly higher than that in controls (4%, 95% CI = 0.01-0.13). Conversely, similar proportions of cases and controls demonstrated olfactory bulb signal abnormalities (88% and 94%) and olfactory mucosa abnormalities (2% and 0%). Descriptive analysis found that 55.6% and 43.5% of patients with COVID-19 infection and OD had morphological abnormalities of the olfactory bulb and olfactory nerve, respectively, while 60.0% had abnormal olfactory bulb volumes.
CONCLUSION
Our findings implicate a conductive mechanism of OD, localized to the olfactory cleft, in approximately half of the affected COVID-19 patients. Laryngoscope, 132:1260-1274, 2022.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; COVID-19; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; Olfactory Bulb; Olfactory Mucosa; Smell
PubMed: 35318656
DOI: 10.1002/lary.30078 -
PloS One 2023The life quality of about two-thirds of patients with COVID-19 is affected by related olfactory dysfunctions. The negative impact of olfactory dysfunction ranged from...
Effect of any form of steroids in comparison with that of other medications on the duration of olfactory dysfunction in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review of randomized trials and quasi-experimental studies.
BACKGROUND
The life quality of about two-thirds of patients with COVID-19 is affected by related olfactory dysfunctions. The negative impact of olfactory dysfunction ranged from the decreased pleasure of eating to impaired quality of life. This research aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the effects of corticosteroid treatments by comparing that to other currently available treatments and interventions.
METHODS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist's 27-point checklist was used to conduct this review. PubMed (Public/Publisher MEDLINE), PubMed Central and EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database) databases were conveniently selected and Boolean search commands were used for a comprehensive literature search. Five core search terms were "effects of treatments", " COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction", "corticosteroids", "treatments" and "interventions". The reporting qualities of the included studies were appraised using JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) appraisal tools. The characteristics of the 21 experimental studies with a total sample (of 130,550) were aggregated using frequencies and percentages and presented descriptively. The main interventions and their effects on the duration of the COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction were narratively analyzed.
RESULTS
Among patients with COVID-19, the normal functions of the olfactory lobe were about 23 days earlier to gain with the treatments of fluticasone and triamcinolone acetonide nasal spray compared with that of mometasone furoate nasal spray and oral corticosteroid. The smell loss duration was reduced by fluticasone and triamcinolone acetonide nasal spray 9 days earlier than the inflawell syrup and 16 days earlier than the lavender syrup. The nasal spray of corticosteroids ended the COVID-19-related smell loss symptoms 2 days earlier than the zinc supplementation, about 47 days earlier than carbamazepine treatment and was more effective than palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) and luteolin and omega-3 supplementations and olfactory training. Treatment with oral corticosteroid plus olfactory training significantly improved Threshold, Discrimination and Identification (TDI) scores compared with olfactory training alone. A full dose of the COVID-19 vaccination was not uncertain to reduce the COVID-19-related smell loss duration.
CONCLUSION
Corticosteroid treatment is effective in reducing the duration of COVID-19-related smell loss and olfactory training, the basic, essential and effective intervention, should be used as a combination therapy.
Topics: Humans; Nasal Sprays; Anosmia; Quality of Life; Triamcinolone Acetonide; COVID-19; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Steroids; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Fluticasone
PubMed: 37531338
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288285 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2002Snoezelen, multi-sensory stimulation, provides sensory stimuli to stimulate the primary senses of sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell, through the use of lighting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Snoezelen, multi-sensory stimulation, provides sensory stimuli to stimulate the primary senses of sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell, through the use of lighting effects, tactile surfaces, meditative music and the odour of relaxing essential oils (Pinkney 1997). The clinical application of snoezelen has been extended from the field of learning disability to dementia care over the past decade. The rationale for its use lies in providing a sensory environment that places fewer demands on intellectual abilities but capitalizes on the residual sensorimotor abilities of people with dementia (e.g. Buettner 1999, Hope 1998). Practitioners are keen to use snoezelen in dementia care, and some encouraging results have been documented in the area of promoting adaptive behaviours (e.g. Baker, Long 1992, Spaull 1998). However, the clinical application of snoezelen often varies in form, nature, principles and procedures. Such variations not only make examination of the therapeutic values of Snoezelen difficult, but also impede the clinical development of snoezelen in dementia care. A systematic review of evidence for the efficacy of snoezelen in the care of people with dementia is therefore needed to inform future clinical applications and research directions.
OBJECTIVES
This review aims to examine the clinical efficacy of snoezelen for older people with dementia.
SEARCH STRATEGY
"Snoezelen", "multi-sensory", "dement*", "Alzheimer*", "randomized control/single control/double control" were used as keywords to search seven electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, PsyLIT). The list of trials was compared with those identified from a search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All RCTs in which Snoezelen or multi-sensory programmes were used as an intervention for people with dementia were included in the review. Trial data included in the review were restricted to those involving people aged over 60 years suffering from any type of dementia, except one subject of Baker's study was aged below 60 years.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Only two RCTs fulfill the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Two reviewers independently extracted the data from these two inclusion studies. Quantitative synthesis of the comparable data from the two trials was performed.
MAIN RESULTS
Two trials were included. Both Baker (and Kragt examined the short-term values of snoezelen on the behaviours of people with dementia. Although the pooled results were insignificant, the trend was in the direction of favouring treatment (hence a negative value of the SMD). The standardized mean difference (SMD) was -1.22, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) (-4.08, 1.64). Kragt's result, weighted 47%, was significant in favour of treatment, with a SMD of -2.77 and a 95% CI (-4.24, -1.29). During the snoezelen session, Kragt's subjects presented significantly fewer apathetic behaviours (t=-8.22, p<0.01), fewer restless behaviours (t=-3.00, p=0.01), fewer repetitive behaviours (t=-.822, p<0.01), and fewer disturbances (t=-4.91, p<0.01). Baker's result was slightly not in favour of the treatment, with a SMD of 0.16 and a 95% CI (-0.41, 0.73). The control subjects touched objects/equipment more appropriately within the activity sessions than the subjects who participated in snoezelen sessions (F(1,47)=5.96, p=.001). Kragt did not examine the carryover and long-term effects of snoezelen, so only Baker's results were analysed. Baker used the Behavioural and Mood Disturbance scale (BMD), the REHAB, the CAPE and MMSE to assess patients mood, behaviour and cognition after (but not immediately after) four treatment sessions and eight treatment sessions. Some assessments were carried at home, some at day hospital. There were many subscores and mostly there were no differences between treatment and control. The following significant differences were found with benefit in favour of snoezelen compared with control after four sessions: apathy ezelen compared with control after four sessions: apathy score of the BRS (CAPE) (MD -3.00, 95%CIs -5.87 to -0.13, P=0.04), after eight sessions: mood score of the BRS (CAPE) (MD -2.60, 95%CIs -4.92 to -0.28, P=0.03), total score of the BRS (CAPE) (MD -6.92, 95%CIs -13.13 to -0.7, P=0.03), speech skills of the REHAB (MD 1.46, 95%CIs 0.01 to 2.82, P=0.03), psychomotor subscore of the cognitive assessment scale of CAPE (MD -3.12, 95%CIs -5.31 to -0.93, P<0.01).
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
Two trials were reviewed. Although both studies examined the short-term values of snoezelen on people with dementia, it is not feasible to draw a firm conclusion at this stage, for two main reasons. Firstly, very limited data were available for analysis, thus limiting data inference and generalization. Secondly, different methodology and control conditions were adopted in the two trials. Such variations not only require a careful interpretation of results but also make the comparison of results across studies less valid. Hence, there is an urgent need for more systematic and scientific research studies to examine the clinical value of snoezelen for people with dementia. To our knowledge, there are four RCTs currently in progress. It is hoped that the data and results of these trials will enrich the systematic review of snoezelen for dementia in the next update.
Topics: Aged; Complementary Therapies; Dementia; Humans; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sensory Art Therapies
PubMed: 12519587
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003152 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2013Commercially available preparations of garlic have been reported to have beneficial effects on some of the risk factors associated with atherosclerosis. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Commercially available preparations of garlic have been reported to have beneficial effects on some of the risk factors associated with atherosclerosis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of garlic (both dried and non-powdered preparations) for the treatment of peripheral arterial occlusive disease.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched January 2013) and CENTRAL (2012, Issue 12).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials of garlic therapy in patients with lower limb atherosclerosis were included. The main outcomes were objective measures of progression of underlying atherosclerosis (e.g. ankle pressure measurements, treadmill testing) and subjective measures (e.g. symptom progression).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (RJ and JK) independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. One author (RJ) contacted investigators to obtain information needed for the review that could not be found in published reports.
MAIN RESULTS
One eligible trial with 78 participants was found. Both men and women (aged 40 to 75) were included. The follow-up period was short, 12 weeks only.After twelve weeks of treatment, pain-free walking distance increased from 161 to 207 metres in the group receiving garlic and from 172 to 203 metres in the placebo group. This was not a statistically significant difference. There was no difference in change of systolic or diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, ankle and brachial pressures. No severe side effects were observed and nine patients taking garlic (28%) and four patients taking placebo (12%) complained of a noticeable garlic smell.Three trials were excluded from the review because they did not include any clinical measurements.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
One small trial of short duration found no statistically significant effect of garlic on walking distance.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Arterial Occlusive Diseases; Female; Garlic; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Phytotherapy; Plants, Medicinal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 23633303
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000095.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Review withdrawn from Issue 4, 2016. Replaced by new reviews 'Short‐course oral steroids alone for chronic rhinosinusitis' (Head 2016a) and 'Short‐course oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Review withdrawn from Issue 4, 2016. Replaced by new reviews 'Short‐course oral steroids alone for chronic rhinosinusitis' (Head 2016a) and 'Short‐course oral steroids as an adjunct therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis' (Head 2016b). The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Humans; Nasal Obstruction; Nasal Polyps; Olfaction Disorders; Prednisone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Steroids
PubMed: 27111708
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005232.pub4 -
Parkinsonism & Related Disorders Mar 2014Detecting very early markers of neurodegeneration that predate the diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) is a crucial research topic for the development of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Detecting very early markers of neurodegeneration that predate the diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) is a crucial research topic for the development of disease-modifying therapeutic interventions. Recently (123)I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) myocardial scintigraphy has become widely used for this purpose, since this test shows high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of PD, based on evidence that cardiac sympathetic nerve fibers are affected early and commonly in PD. We reviewed the literature to determine the role of MIBG myocardial scintigraphy for diagnosing pre-motor PD.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify the use of MIBG myocardial scintigraphy in relation to the constellation of pre-motor symptoms in PD.
RESULTS
Mild memory disorder, autonomic failure (constipation and postural hypotension), depression/anxiety, visual hallucination/psychosis (in the elderly), sleep disorder (REM sleep behavior disorder), and impaired olfaction are reported to appear as sole initial symptoms of PD. All clinical features except for impaired olfaction are accompanied by low MIBG uptake, suggestive of very early PD in situ.
CONCLUSION
Identifying persons with mild memory disorder, constipation/postural hypotension, depression/anxiety, visual hallucination/psychosis (in the elderly), and REM sleep behavior disorder associated with low MIBG uptake may provide a unique opportunity to detect very early PD in situ within a pre-clinical window. Future prospective studies to investigate further the findings of these early cases are warranted.
Topics: 3-Iodobenzylguanidine; Animals; Constipation; Humans; Hypotension, Orthostatic; Memory Disorders; Myocardial Perfusion Imaging; Parkinson Disease; REM Sleep Behavior Disorder; Radiopharmaceuticals
PubMed: 24332912
DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2013.11.001 -
BMJ Medicine 2023To determine the effect of covid-19 vaccination, given before and after acute infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or after a diagnosis of long covid, on the rates and...
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effect of covid-19 vaccination, given before and after acute infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or after a diagnosis of long covid, on the rates and symptoms of long covid.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane covid-19 trials, and Europe PubMed Central (Europe PMC) for preprints, from 1 January 2020 to 3 August 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies reporting on patients with long covid and symptoms of long covid, with vaccination before and after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or after a diagnosis of long covid. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool.
RESULTS
1645 articles were screened but no randomised controlled trials were found. 16 observational studies from five countries (USA, UK, France, Italy, and the Netherlands) were identified that reported on 614 392 patients. The most common symptoms of long covid that were studied were fatigue, cough, loss of sense of smell, shortness of breath, loss of taste, headache, muscle ache, difficulty sleeping, difficulty concentrating, worry or anxiety, and memory loss or confusion. 12 studies reported data on vaccination before infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and 10 showed a significant reduction in the incidence of long covid: the odds ratio of developing long covid with one dose of vaccine ranged from 0.22 to 1.03; with two doses, odds ratios were 0.25-1; with three doses, 0.16; and with any dose, 0.48-1.01. Five studies reported on vaccination after infection, with odds ratios of 0.38-0.91. The high heterogeneity between studies precluded any meaningful meta-analysis. The studies failed to adjust for potential confounders, such as other protective behaviours and missing data, thus increasing the risk of bias and decreasing the certainty of evidence to low.
CONCLUSIONS
Current studies suggest that covid-19 vaccines might have protective and therapeutic effects on long covid. More robust comparative observational studies and trials are needed, however, to clearly determine the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing and treating long covid.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
Open Science Framework https://osf.io/e8jdy.
PubMed: 36936268
DOI: 10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000385 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016This review is one of six looking at the primary medical management options for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.Chronic rhinosinusitis is common and is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This review is one of six looking at the primary medical management options for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.Chronic rhinosinusitis is common and is characterised by inflammation of the lining of the nose and paranasal sinuses leading to nasal blockage, nasal discharge, facial pressure/pain and loss of sense of smell. The condition can occur with or without nasal polyps. Nasal saline irrigation is commonly used to improve patient symptoms.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of saline irrigation in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 9); MEDLINE; EMBASE; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 30 October 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up period of at least three months comparing saline delivered to the nose by any means (douche, irrigation, drops, spray or nebuliser) with (a) placebo, (b) no treatment or (c) other pharmacological interventions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL), patient-reported disease severity and the commonest adverse event - epistaxis. Secondary outcomes included general HRQL, endoscopic nasal polyp score, computerised tomography (CT) scan score and the adverse events of local irritation and discomfort. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two RCTs (116 adult participants). One compared large-volume (150 ml) hypertonic (2%) saline irrigation with usual treatment over a six-month period; the other compared 5 ml nebulised saline twice a day with intranasal corticosteroids, treating participants for three months and evaluating them on completion of treatment and three months later. Large-volume, hypertonic nasal saline versus usual care One trial included 76 adult participants (52 intervention, 24 control) with or without polyps.Disease-specific HRQL was reported using the Rhinosinusitis Disability Index (RSDI; 0 to 100, 100 = best quality of life). At the end of three months of treatment, patients in the saline group were better than those in the placebo group (mean difference (MD) 6.3 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 11.71) and at six months there was a greater effect (MD 13.5 points, 95% CI 9.63 to 17.37). We assessed the evidence to be of low quality for the three months follow-up and very low quality for the six months follow-up. Patient-reported disease severity was evaluated using a "single-item sinus symptom severity assessment" but the range of scores is not stated, making it impossible for us to determine the meaning of the data presented.No adverse effects data were collected in the control group but 23% of participants in the saline group experienced side effects including epistaxis. General HRQL was measured using SF-12 (0 to 100, 100 = best quality of life). No difference was found after three months of treatment (low quality evidence) but at six months there was a small difference favouring the saline group, which may not be of clinical significance and has high uncertainty (MD 10.5 points, 95% CI 0.66 to 20.34) (very low quality evidence). Low-volume, nebulised saline versus intranasal corticosteroids One trial included 40 adult participants with polyps. Our primary outcome of disease-specific HRQL was not reported. At the end of treatment (three months) the patients who had intranasal corticosteroids had less severe symptoms (MD -13.50, 95% CI -14.44 to -12.56); this corresponds to a large effect size. We assessed the evidence to be of very low quality.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The two studies were very different in terms of included populations, interventions and comparisons and so it is therefore difficult to draw conclusions for practice. The evidence suggests that there is no benefit of a low-volume (5 ml) nebulised saline spray over intranasal steroids. There is some benefit of daily, large-volume (150 ml) saline irrigation with a hypertonic solution when compared with placebo, but the quality of the evidence is low for three months and very low for six months of treatment.
Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Chronic Disease; Humans; Hypertonic Solutions; Nasal Polyps; Nasal Sprays; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Sodium Chloride; Therapeutic Irrigation; Time Factors
PubMed: 27115216
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011995.pub2 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Jul 2021Food anticipatory hormonal responses (cephalic responses) are proactive physiological processes, that allow animals to prepare for food ingestion by modulating their... (Review)
Review
Food anticipatory hormonal responses (cephalic responses) are proactive physiological processes, that allow animals to prepare for food ingestion by modulating their hormonal levels in response to food cues. This process is important for digesting food, metabolizing nutrients and maintaining glucose levels within homeostasis. In this systematic review, we summarize the evidence from animal and human research on cephalic responses. Thirty-six animal and fifty-three human studies were included. The majority (88 %) of studies demonstrated that hormonal levels are changed in response to cues previously associated with food intake, such as feeding time, smell, and sight of food. Most evidence comes from studies on insulin, ghrelin, pancreatic polypeptide, glucagon, and c-peptide. Moreover, impaired cephalic responses were found in disorders related to metabolism and food intake such as diabetes, pancreatic insufficiency, obesity, and eating disorders, which opens discussions about the etiological mechanisms of these disorders as well as on potential therapeutic opportunities.
Topics: Animals; Blood Glucose; Eating; Food; Ghrelin; Humans; Insulin
PubMed: 33812978
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.03.030 -
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