Management of Post-Infectious Anosmia and Hyposmia: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Anosmia and hyposmia significantly affect patients' quality of life and have many etiologies, including trauma, inflammatory conditions including chronic rhinosinusitis, neoplasm, and viral infections, such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to establish whether a consensus exists regarding optimal management of olfactory dysfunction and to provide insight into the treatment of anosmia in the current climate of increased prevalence secondary to COVID-19. Thus, we aimed to systematically review the literature on the management of non-Chronic-rhinosinusitis- related anosmia/hyposmia. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published since January 1990 using terms combined with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). We included articles evaluating management of anosmia and hyposmia written in the English language, with original data, a minimum of 3 months of follow-up except for COVID-related studies, at least 2 patients, and well-defined and measurable outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 3013 unique titles were returned upon the initial search. Of these, 297 abstracts were examined, yielding 19 full texts meeting inclusion criteria (8 with level 1 evidence, 3 with level 2, 1 with level 3, and 7 with level 4). The studies included a total of 1522 subjects, with follow up ranging from 3 to 72 months, with an exception for COVID related studies. Endpoints were based on clinically significant improvements of olfactory functions as measured through validated smell tests. Treatments with the most robust data were intranasal corticosteroids and olfactory training. CONCLUSION: The literature on the treatment of anosmia and hyposmia includes randomized trials showing the efficacy of a few modalities. While further research is needed to expand therapeutic options for this debilitating condition, the current literature supports the use of olfactory training and topical corticosteroids.

YouTube Videos Demonstrating the Nasopharyngeal Swab Technique for SARS-CoV-2 Specimen Collection: Content Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Real-time polymerase chain reaction using nasopharyngeal swabs is currently the most widely used diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 detection. However, false negatives and the sensitivity of this mode of testing have posed challenges in the accurate estimation of the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection rates. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether technical and, therefore, correctable errors were being made with regard to nasopharyngeal swab procedures. METHODS: We searched a web-based video database (YouTube) for videos demonstrating SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab tests, posted from January 1 to May 15, 2020. Videos were rated by 3 blinded rhinologists for accuracy of swab angle and depth. The overall score for swab angle and swab depth for each nasopharyngeal swab demonstration video was determined based on the majority score with agreement between at least 2 of the 3 reviewers. We then comparatively evaluated video data collected from YouTube videos demonstrating the correct nasopharyngeal swab technique with data from videos demonstrating an incorrect nasopharyngeal swab technique. Multiple linear regression analysis with statistical significance set at P=.05 was performed to determine video data variables associated with the correct nasopharyngeal swab technique. RESULTS: In all, 126 videos met the study inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 52.3% (66/126) of all videos demonstrated the correct swab angle, and 46% (58/126) of the videos demonstrated an appropriate swab depth. Moreover, 45.2% (57/126) of the videos demonstrated both correct nasopharyngeal swab angle and appropriate depth, whereas 46.8% (59/126) of the videos demonstrated both incorrect nasopharyngeal swab angle and inappropriate depth. Videos with correct nasopharyngeal swab technique were associated with the swab operators identifying themselves as a medical professional or as an Ear, Nose, Throat-related medical professional. We also found an association between correct nasopharyngeal swab techniques and recency of video publication date (relative to May 15, 2020). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that over half of the videos documenting the nasopharyngeal swab test showed an incorrect technique, which could elevate false-negative test rates. Therefore, greater attention needs to be provided toward educating frontline health care workers who routinely perform nasopharyngeal swab procedures.

Topical Oral and Intranasal Antiviral Agents for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

With the largest viral loads in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) present in the oral and nasal cavities, agents that act on these two areas have the potential for large therapeutic and prophylactic benefit. A literature review was conducted to elucidate the possible agents useful in treatment of SARS-CoV-2. These agents were evaluated for their current applications, adverse reactions, their current state of study, and any future considerations in their management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019). Our review has found that, while there are many promising agents with proven efficacy in their in-vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV-2, more clinical trials and in-vivo studies, as well as safety trials, must be conducted before these agents can be effectively implemented.

Diagnosis of Anosmia and Hyposmia: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Anosmia and hyposmia have many etiologies, including trauma, chronic sinusitis, neoplasms, and respiratory viral infections such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to systematically review the literature on the diagnostic evaluation of anosmia/hyposmia. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published since January 1990 using terms combined with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). We included articles evaluating diagnostic modalities for anosmia, written in the English language, used original data, and had two or more patients. RESULTS: A total of 2065 unique titles were returned upon the initial search. Of these, 226 abstracts were examined, yielding 27 full-text articles meeting inclusion criteria (Level of evidence ranging from 1 to 4; most level 2). The studies included a total of 13,577 patients. The most utilized diagnostic tools were orthonasal smell tests (such as the Sniffin' Sticks and the UPSIT, along with validated abridged smell tests). Though various imaging modalities (including MRI and CT) were frequently mentioned in the workup of olfactory dysfunction, routine imaging was not used to primarily diagnose smell loss. CONCLUSION: The literature includes several studies on validity and reliability for various smell tests in diagnosing anosmia. Along with a thorough history and physical, validated orthonasal smell tests should be part of the workup of the patient with suspected olfactory dysfunction. The most widely studied modality was MRI, but criteria for the timing and sequence of imaging modalities was heterogenous.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 ICU Patients Have Higher-Than-Expected Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-Adjusted Mortality and Length of Stay Than Viral Pneumonia ICU Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV-adjusted mortality and length of stay outcomes of adult ICU patients who tested positive for coronavirus disease 2019 with patients admitted to ICU with other viral pneumonias including a subgroup with viral pneumonia and concurrent acute respiratory distress syndrome (viral pneumonia-acute respiratory distress syndrome). DESIGN: Retrospective review of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation data collected from routine clinical care. SETTING: Forty-three hospitals contributing coronavirus disease 2019 patient data between March 14, and June 17, 2020, and 132 hospitals in the United States contributing data on viral pneumonia patients to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation database between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. PATIENTS AND MEASUREMENTS: One thousand four hundred ninety-one patients with diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 infection and 4,200 patients with a primary (n = 2,544) or secondary (n = 1,656) admitting diagnosis of noncoronavirus disease viral pneumonia receiving ICU care. A subset of 202 viral pneumonia patients with concurrent acute respiratory distress syndrome was examined separately. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN RESULTS: Mean age was 63.4 for coronavirus disease (p = 0.064) versus 64.1 for viral pneumonia. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV scores were similar at 56.7 and 55.0, respectively (p = 0.060), but gender and ethnic distributions differed, as did Pao2 to Fio2 ratio and WBC count at admission. The hospital standardized mortality ratio (95% CI) was 1.52 (1.35-1.68) for coronavirus disease patients and 0.82 (0.75-0.90) for viral pneumonia patients. In the coronavirus disease group, ICU and hospital length of stay were 3.1 and 3.0 days longer than in viral pneumonia patients. Standardized ICU and hospital length of stay ratios were 1.13 and 1.46 in the coronavirus disease group versus 0.95 and 0.94 in viral pneumonia patients. Forty-seven percent of coronavirus disease patients received invasive or noninvasive ventilatory support on their first ICU day versus 65% with viral pneumonia. Ventilator days in survivors were longer in coronavirus disease (10.4 d) than in viral pneumonia (4.3 d) patients, except in the viral pneumonia-acute respiratory distress syndrome subgroup (10.2 d). CONCLUSIONS: Severity-adjusted mortality and length of stay are higher for coronavirus disease 2019 patients than for viral pneumonia patients admitted to ICU. Coronavirus disease patients also have longer time on ventilator and ICU length of stay, comparable with the subset of viral pneumonia patients with concurrent acute respiratory distress syndrome. Mortality and length of stay increase with age and higher scores in both populations, but observed to predicted mortality and length of stay are higher than expected with coronavirus disease patients across all severity of illness levels. These findings have implications for benchmarking ICU outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in-office procedures.

OBJECTIVE: Cadaveric simulations have shown endonasal drilling and cautery generate aerosols, which is a significant concern for otolaryngologists during the COVID-19 era. This study quantifies aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in-office procedures in live patients. METHODS: Aerosols ranging from 0.30 to 10.0 µm were measured in real-time using an optical particle sizer during surgeries and in-office procedures. Various mask conditions were tested during rigid nasal endoscopy (RNE) and postoperative debridement (POD). RESULTS: Higher aerosol concentrations (AC) ranging from 2.69 to 10.0 µm were measured during RNE (n = 9) with no mask vs two mask conditions (P = .002 and P = .017). Mean AC (0.30-10.0 µm) were significantly higher during POD (n = 9) for no mask vs a mask covering the patient's mouth condition (mean difference = 0.16 ± 0.03 particles/cm3, 95% CI 0.10-0.22, P < .001). There were no discernible spikes in aerosol levels during endoscopic septoplasty (n = 3). Aerosol spikes were measured in two of three functional endoscopic sinus surgeries (FESS) with microdebrider. Using suction mitigation, there were no discernible spikes during powered drilling in two anterior skull base surgeries (ASBS). CONCLUSION: Use of a surgical mask over the patient's mouth during in-office procedures or a mask with a slit for an endoscope during RNE significantly diminished aerosol generation. However, whether this reduction in aerosol generation is sufficient to prevent transmission of communicable diseases via aerosols was beyond the scope of this study. There were several spikes in aerosols during FESS and ASBS, though none were associated with endonasal drilling with the use of suction mitigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Intranasal Antiviral Drug Delivery and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A State of the Art Review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a state of the art review of intranasal antiviral drug delivery and to discuss current applications, adverse reactions, and future considerations in the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov search engines. REVIEW METHODS: A structured search of the current literature was performed of dates up to and including April 2020. Search terms were queried as related to topics of antiviral agents and intranasal applications. A series of video conferences was convened among experts in otolaryngology, infectious diseases, public health, pharmacology, and virology to review the literature and discuss relevant findings. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal drug delivery for antiviral agents has been studied for many years. Several agents have broad-spectrum antiviral activity, but they still require human safety and efficacy trials prior to implementation. Intranasal drug delivery has potential relevance for future clinical trials in the settings of disease spread prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 and other viral diseases. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Intranasal drug delivery represents an important area of research for COVID-19 and other viral diseases. The consideration of any potential adverse reactions is paramount.

Comparison of Patient Satisfaction Between Virtual Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic and In-person Visits Pre-pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the patient experience of a virtual otolaryngology clinic visit to an in-person visit, especially with its significantly increased implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patient satisfaction (PS) metrics from the Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey were queried from March 1, 2020 to May 1, 2020 for telehealth visits and January 1, 2020 to March 1, 2020 for in-person visits. Overlapping and comparable questions were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U test, Chi-square test for independence, and Student's t-test. RESULTS: There were 1284 partial or complete PS surveys from in-person visits and 221 partial or complete virtual PS surveys. There were statistically significantly worse virtual visit evaluations of provider listening, conveyance of information, likelihood to recommend, and overall provider ratings compared to in-person visits. CONCLUSION: Telehealth has become the new norm for most healthcare providers in the United States. This study demonstrates some of the initial shortcomings of telehealth in an otolaryngology practice and identifies challenges with interpersonal communication that may need to be addressed as telehealth becomes increasingly prevalent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Mitigation of Aerosols Generated During Rhinologic Surgery: A Pandemic-Era Cadaveric Simulation.

OBJECTIVE: After significant restrictions initially due to the COVID-19 pandemic, otolaryngologists have begun resuming normal clinical practice. However, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to health care workers through aerosolization and airborne transmission during rhinologic surgery remains incompletely characterized. The objective of this study was to quantify the number concentrations of aerosols generated during rhinologic surgery with and without interventions involving 3 passive suction devices. STUDY DESIGN: Cadaver simulation. SETTING: Dedicated surgical laboratory. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In a simulation of rhinologic procedures with and without different passive suction interventions, the concentrations of generated aerosols in the particle size range of 0.30 to 10.0 µm were quantified with an optical particle sizer. RESULTS: Functional endoscopic sinus surgery with and without microdebrider, high-speed powered drilling, use of an ultrasonic aspirator, and electrocautery all produced statistically significant increases in concentrations of aerosols of various sizes (P < .05). Powered drilling, ultrasonic aspirator, and electrocautery generated the highest concentration of aerosols, predominantly submicroparticles <1 µm. All interventions with a suction device were effective in reducing aerosols, though the surgical smoke evacuation system was the most effective passive suction method in 2 of the 5 surgical conditions with statistical significance (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Significant aerosol concentrations were produced in the range of 0.30 to 10.0 µm during all rhinologic procedures in this cadaver simulation. Rhinologic surgery with a passive suction device results in significant mitigation of generated aerosols.

Assessment of Patient Experiences in Otolaryngology Virtual Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This study evaluates the patient experience during virtual otolaryngology clinic visits implemented during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patient satisfaction surveys were queried from January 1, 2020, to May 1, 2020, for both telehealth and in-person visits. A descriptive analysis of the question responses was performed. There were 195 virtual and 4013 in-person visits with surveys completed in this time period. Ratings related to provider-patient communication were poor for virtual visits. Telehealth has become the new norm for most health care providers in the United States. This study demonstrates some of the initial shortcomings of telehealth in an otolaryngology practice and identifies challenges with interpersonal communication that may need to be addressed as telehealth becomes increasingly prevalent.

Correlations of Online Search Engine Trends With Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Incidence: Infodemiology Study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is the latest pandemic of the digital age. With the internet harvesting large amounts of data from the general population in real time, public databases such as Google Trends (GT) and the Baidu Index (BI) can be an expedient tool to assist public health efforts. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to apply digital epidemiology to the current COVID-19 pandemic to determine the utility of providing adjunctive epidemiologic information on outbreaks of this disease and evaluate this methodology in the case of future pandemics. METHODS: An epidemiologic time series analysis of online search trends relating to the COVID-19 pandemic was performed from January 9, 2020, to April 6, 2020. BI was used to obtain online search data for China, while GT was used for worldwide data, the countries of Italy and Spain, and the US states of New York and Washington. These data were compared to real-world confirmed cases and deaths of COVID-19. Chronologic patterns were assessed in relation to disease patterns, significant events, and media reports. RESULTS: Worldwide search terms for shortness of breath, anosmia, dysgeusia and ageusia, headache, chest pain, and sneezing had strong correlations (r>0.60, P<.001) to both new daily confirmed cases and deaths from COVID-19. GT COVID-19 (search term) and GT coronavirus (virus) searches predated real-world confirmed cases by 12 days (r=0.85, SD 0.10 and r=0.76, SD 0.09, respectively, P<.001). Searches for symptoms of diarrhea, fever, shortness of breath, cough, nasal obstruction, and rhinorrhea all had a negative lag greater than 1 week compared to new daily cases, while searches for anosmia and dysgeusia peaked worldwide and in China with positive lags of 5 days and 6 weeks, respectively, corresponding with widespread media coverage of these symptoms in COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the utility of digital epidemiology in providing helpful surveillance data of disease outbreaks like COVID-19. Although certain online search trends for this disease were influenced by media coverage, many search terms reflected clinical manifestations of the disease and showed strong correlations with real-world cases and deaths.