Analysis of Risk Factors for Tracheal Stenosis Managed during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective, Case-Control Study from Two European Referral Centre.

INTRODUCTION: Benign subglottic/tracheal stenosis (SG/TS) is a life-threatening condition commonly caused by prolonged endotracheal intubation or tracheostomy. Invasive mechanical ventilation was frequently used to manage severe COVID-19, resulting in an increased number of patients with various degrees of residual stenosis following respiratory weaning. The aim of this study was to compare demographics, radiological characteristics, and surgical outcomes between COVID-19 and non-COVID patients treated for tracheal stenosis and investigate the potential differences between the groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively retrieved electronical medical records of patients managed at two referral centers for airways diseases (IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital and Avicenne Hospital) with tracheal stenosis between March 2020 and May 2022 and grouped according to SAR-CoV-2 infection status. All patients underwent a radiological and endoscopic evaluation followed by multidisciplinary team consultation. Follow-up was performed through quarterly outpatient consultation. Clinical findings and outcomes were analyzed by using SPPS software. A significance level of 5% (p < 0.05) was adopted for comparisons. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients with a mean age of 56.4 (±13.4) years were surgically managed. Tracheal stenosis was COVID related in 36 (61%) patients. Obesity was frequent in the COVID-19 group (29.7 ± 5.4 vs. 26.9 ± 3, p = 0.043) while no difference was found regarding age, sex, number, and types of comorbidities between the two groups. In the COVID-19 group, orotracheal intubation lasted longer (17.7 ± 14.5 vs. 9.7 ± 5.8 days, p = 0.001), tracheotomy (80%, p = 0.003) as well as re-tracheotomy (6% of cases, p = 0.025) were more frequent and tracheotomy maintenance was longer (21.5 ± 11.9 days, p = 0.006) when compared to the non-COVID group. COVID-19 stenosis was located more distal from vocal folds (3.0 ± 1.86 vs. 1.8 ± 2.03 cm) yet without evidence of a difference (p = 0.07). The number of tracheal rings involved was lower in the non-COVID group (1.7 ± 1 vs. 2.6 ± 0.8 p = 0.001) and stenosis were more frequently managed by rigid bronchoscopy (74% vs. 47%, p = 0.04) when compared to the COVID-19 group. Finally, no difference in recurrence rate was detected between the groups (35% vs. 15%, p = 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity, a longer time of intubation, tracheostomy, re-tracheostomy, and longer decannulation time occurred more frequently in COVID-related tracheal stenosis. These events may explain the higher number of tracheal rings involved, although we cannot exclude the direct role of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the genesis of tracheal stenosis. Further studies with in vitro/in vivo models will be helpful to better understand the role of inflammatory status caused by SARS-CoV-2 in upper airways.

Long-standing gustatory and olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: Our study aimed to describe recovery of gustatory dysfunction (GD) and olfactory dysfunction (OD) in COVID-19 patients, and to analyze variables associated with early or late recovery. METHODS: Telephone surveys were administered during an 18-month follow-up after COVID-19 diagnosis. One hundred and thirty-two included patients rated olfactory and gustatory function at each follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine patients reported GD, of whom 91 (70.5%) reported severe GD, and 99 patients reported OD, of whom 84 (84.9%) reported severe OD. Seventy-two/129 (55.8%) and 52/99 (52.5%) patients reported an improvement in GD and in OD during the first 7 days from the onset, respectively. At 3-month follow-up, 110/120 patients (85.3%) recovered from GD, while 80/99 patients (80.8%) recovered from OD. At 18-month follow-up, a total of 120/129 patients (93.0%) recovered from GD and 86/99 patients (86.9%) recovered from OD; while 10 patients (7.0%) still reported GD and 13 patients (13.1%) still reported OD. Severe GD/OD at presentation were associated with late complete recovery of taste/smell (p = 0.019 and p = 0.034, respectively). Improvement over the first 7 days from onset was significantly associated with faster recovery (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: More than 80% of patients reported complete recovery of olfactory/gustatory function in the first 3 months after symptom onset. At 18-month follow-up, patients reporting complete recovery of gustatory and olfactory function were 93% and 87%, respectively. Severity of chemosensory dysfunction at the onset was negatively correlated to recovery, and improvement of taste and/or smell function within the first 7 days from symptom onset was significantly associated with early resolution.

Antibody Persistence 6 Months Post-Vaccination with BNT162b2 among Health Care Workers.

BACKGROUND: We present immunogenicity data 6 months after the first dose of BNT162b2 in correlation with age, gender, BMI, comorbidities and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: An immunogenicity evaluation was carried out among health care workers (HCW) vaccinated at the Istituti Fisioterapici Ospitalieri (IFO). All HCW were asked to be vaccine by the national vaccine campaign at the beginning of 2021. Serum samples were collected on day 1 just prior to the first dose of the vaccine and on day 21 just prior to the second vaccination dose. Thereafter sera samples were collected 28, 49, 84 and 168 days after the first dose of BNT162b2. Quantitative measurement of IgG antibodies against S1/S2 antigens of SARS-CoV-2 was performed with a commercial chemiluminescent immunoassay. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-four HWCs were analyzed, 175 women (63.9%) and 99 men (36.1%). The maximum antibody geometric mean concentration (AbGMC) was reached at T2 (299.89 AU/mL; 95% CI: 263.53-339.52) with a significant increase compared to baseline (p < 0.0001). Thereafter, a progressive decrease was observed. At T5, a median decrease of 59.6% in COVID-19 negative, and of 67.8% in COVID-19 positive individuals were identified with respect to the highest antibody response. At T1, age and previous COVID-19 were associated with differences in antibody response, while at T2 and T3 differences in immune response were associated with age, gender and previous COVID-19. At T4 and T5, only COVID-19 positive participants demonstrated a greater antibody response, whereas no other variables seemed to influence antibody levels. CONCLUSIONS: Overall our study clearly shows antibody persistence at 6 months, albeit with a certain decline. Thus, the use of this vaccine in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic is supported by our results that in turn open debate about the need for further boosts.

Early Onset of SARS-COV-2 Antibodies after First Dose of BNT162b2: Correlation with Age, Gender and BMI.

BACKGROUND: The first goal of the study was to analyse the antibody titre 21 days after the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine in a group of 252 healthcare workers (HCW). The second goal was to analyse how the antibody titre changes in correlation with age, gender and body mass index (BMI). METHODS: Participants had a nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 and were assessed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline and 21 days after the BNT162b2 priming dose. RESULTS: First dose of BNT162b2 activated immune responses in 98% of the participants. Five HWC had no increase in antibody titre 21 days after the first dose. Antibody titre was greater in young (<38 years) vs. older participants (<38 vs. 47-56 p = 0.002; <38 vs. >56 p = 0.001). Higher antibody levels were detected in underweight vs. pre-obesity group (p = 0.026) and in normal-weight vs. pre-obesity group (p = 0.007). This association was confirmed after adjusting for age (p = 0.0001) and gender (p = 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that a single dose of BNT162b2 activates the immune response, and being young and normal-weight correlate positively with this response. Larger specifically designed clinical trials are needed to validate these results.

Initial observations on age, gender, BMI and hypertension in antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Literature data suggests that age, gender and body mass index (BMI) could be associated with difference in immune responses to vaccines. The first goal of the study was to analyze the antibody titre seven days after the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine in a group of 248 healthcare workers (HCWs). The second goal was to analyze how antibody titre changes in correlation with age, gender, BMI and hypertension. METHODS: An immunogenicity evaluation was carried out among HCWs vaccinated at the Istituti Fisioterapici Ospitalieri (IFO), Rome, Italy. All HCWs were asked to be vaccinated by the Italian national vaccine campaign at the beginning of 2021. 260 vaccinated HCWs were enrolled in the study. All eligible participants were assigned to receive the priming dose in two weeks' time and the booster dose exactly 21 days thereafter. Blood and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected at baseline and 7 days after second dose of vaccine. Quantitative measurements of IgG antibodies against S1/S2 antigens of SARS-CoV-2 were performed with a commercial chemiluminescent immunoassay. Presence of SARS-Cov-2 in nasopharyngeal swab was determined by commercial RT-PCR testing. FINDINGS: 248 HWCs were analyzed, 158 women (63.7%) and 90 men (36.3%). After the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine, 99.5% of participants developed a humoral immune response. The geometric mean concentration of antibodies among the vaccinated subjects after booster dose (285.9 AU/mL 95% CI: 249.5-327.7) was higher than that of human convalescent sera (39.4 AU/mL, 95% CI: 33.1-46.9), with p<0.0001. Multivariate linear regression analysis of AU/mL by age, gender and BMI multivariate was performed by the inclusion of covariates. This analysis demonstrated that age (p<0.0001) and gender (p = 0.038) are statistically associated with differences in antibody response after vaccination, whereas BMI and hypertension have no statistically significant association (p = 0.078 and p = 0.52 respectively). INTERPRETATION: 99.5% of HCW developed a humoral immune response and female and young participants seem to have an increased capacity to mount humoral immune responses. BMI and hypertension seem not associated with difference in immune response to the vaccine. FUNDING: None.

Sudden neck swelling with rash as late manifestation of COVID-19: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Although there are reports of otolaryngological symptoms and manifestations of CoronaVirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), there have been no documented cases of sudden neck swelling with rash in patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection described in literature. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of a sudden neck swelling and rash likely due to late SARS-CoV-2 in a 64-year-old woman. The patient reported COVID-19 symptoms over the previous three weeks. Computed Tomography (CT) revealed a diffuse soft-tissue swelling and edema of subcutaneous tissue, hypodermis, and muscular and deep fascial planes. All the differential diagnoses were ruled out. Both the anamnestic history of the patient's husband who had died of COVID-19 with and the collateral findings of pneumonia and esophageal wall edema suggested the association with COVID-19. This was confirmed by nasopharyngeal swab polymerase chain reaction. The patient was treated with lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine and piperacillin/tazobactam for 7 days. The neck swelling resolved in less than 24 h, while the erythema was still present up to two days later. The patient was discharged after seven days in good clinical condition and with a negative swab. CONCLUSION: Sudden neck swelling with rash may be a coincidental presentation, but, in the pandemic context, it is most likely a direct or indirect complication of COVID-19.

Prevalence of Taste and Smell Dysfunction in Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Importance: Early diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may help control the diffusion of the disease into the population. Objective: To investigate the presence of sinonasal manifestations at the onset of COVID-19 to achieve an earlier diagnosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective telephone survey study investigated patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from March 5 to March 23, 2020, who were hospitalized or discharged from a single referral center. Patients who were unable to answer (intubated, receiving noninvasive ventilation, or deceased) or unreachable by telephone were excluded. Of 359 consecutive patients, 204 fulfilled the inclusion criteria; 76 were unable to answer, 76 were unreachable by telephone, and 3 refused. Exposures: Sinonasal manifestations reported before COVID-19 diagnosis were studied with a validated questionnaire: Italian Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 (I-SNOT-22). If reduction of taste and/or smell was documented by item 5 of the I-SNOT-22, further inquiries were made to score them separately on a scale from 0 to 5, with 0 indicating no problem and 5 indicating problem as bad as it can be. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prevalence of sinonasal manifestations preceding COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: Among the 204 patients enrolled (110 [53.9%] male; mean [SD] age, 52.6 [14.4] years), the median I-SNOT-22 total score was 21 (range, 0-73). I-SNOT-22 identified 116 patients (56.9%) with reduction of taste and/or smell, 113 (55.4%) with taste reduction (median score, 5; range, 2-5), and 85 (41.7%) with smell reduction (median score, 5; range, 1-5). Eighty-two patients (40.2%) reported both. Severe reduction of taste was present in 81 patients (39.7%), and severe reduction of smell was present in 72 patients (35.3%). Only 12 patients (14.8%) with severe taste reduction and 12 patients (16.7%) with severe smell reduction reported severe nasal obstruction. Severe reduction of taste and smell was more prevalent in female vs male patients (odds ratios, 3.16 [95% CI, 1.76-5.67] vs 2.58 [95% CI, 1.43-4.65]) and middle-aged vs younger patients (effect sizes, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.21-0.78] vs 0.85 [95% CI, 0.55-1.15]). No significant association was observed between smoking habits and severe reduction of taste (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.53-1.71) and/or smell (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.35-1.21). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this telephone survey study suggest that reduction of taste and/or smell may be a frequent and early symptom of COVID-19. Nasal obstruction was not commonly present at the onset of the disease in this study. The general practitioner may play a pivotal role in identifying potential COVID-19 in patients at an early stage if taste and/or smell alterations manifest and in suggesting quarantine before confirmation or exclusion of the diagnosis.

Endoscopic nasopharyngoscopy and ENT specialist safety in the COVID 19 era: the back endoscopy approach to the patient.

PURPOSE: To propose a way to safely perform endoscopic nasopharyngoscopy in ENT outpatient clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This manuscript highlights the importance of endoscopy in daily ENT clinical practice, which is a pivotal procedure in the diagnosis of many head and neck pathologies. However, since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, the authors have witnessed a drastic reduction (91%) in the use of endoscopic nasopharyngoscopy at their institutions. In fact, it is considered at risk of contamination for healthcare professionals, as any upper airway manipulation procedure. RESULTS: In the "Back approach to the patient" for endoscopic nasopharyngoscopy, the operator positions himself behind the patient and faces the monitor. The endoscopist, not being positioned in front of the patient, should, therefore, be less exposed to airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus. CONCLUSION: This simple variation of the physician's position during endoscopic nasopharyngoscopy could potentially reduce the risk of contagion since the operator is not in the trajectory of droplets and/or aerosols.

COVID-19: Nasal and oropharyngeal swab.

Performing a proper nasal and oropharyngeal swab procedure is essential in the screening of COVID-19 infection. The video illustration of nasal and oropharyngeal swab is presented (Video S1). To correctly perform the nasopharyngeal swab, the patient must be seated comfortably with the back of their head against the headrest. The swab is inserted in the nose horizontally, along an imaginary line between the nostril and the ear. Oropharyngeal sampling is easier to perform. The swab is directed toward the rear wall of the oropharynx and it is rotated a few times before removal. After taking the sample, it is necessary to insert both swabs in the same tube, breaking the rod with one swift and controlled movement. Finally, carefully reset the cap. It appears to be extremely important to properly collect nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs in order to minimize the false negative rate among COVID-19 positive patients.