Prevalence and 24-month recovery of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: A multicentre prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and recovery of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in COVID-19 patients 24 months after the infection. METHODS: From 22 March 2020 to 5 June 2022, 251 COVID-19 patients were followed in three European medical centres. Olfactory function was assessed with subjective patient-reported outcome questionnaires and odour identification tests at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postinfection. The predictive values of epidemiological and clinical data were investigated with multivariate analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-one patients completed the evaluations. The odour identification test revealed that 123 patients (50.8%) had OD at baseline. The prevalence of persistent psychophysical abnormalities at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months post-COVID-19 was 24.2%, 17.9%, 5.8% and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.001). Parosmia occurred in 40 patients (23.4%) and lasted 60 ± 119 days. At 2 years, 51 patients (29.8%) self reported that their olfaction was unnormalised. Older patients had better odour identification evaluations at baseline (p < 0.001) but those with OD reported lower odour identification test scores at the end of the follow-up. Parosmia occurred more frequently in young patients. The olfactory training was significantly associated with higher values of Sniffin' Sticks tests at 18 months postinfection (rs = 0.678; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Two years post-COVID-19, 29.8% of patients reported persistent OD, but only 2.9% had abnormal identification psychophysical evaluations.

Assessing the readability and quality of online information on anosmia.

INTRODUCTION: Anosmia can have a significant impact on well-being and quality of life. Due to an ageing population and the coronavirus disease 2019, increasing numbers of patients are seeking online information on anosmia. This report systematically assesses the readability and quality of online information on anosmia. METHODS: The terms 'anosmia' and 'loss of smell' were entered into Google. The first 50 websites generated for each search term were screened. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index and Gunning Fog Index (GFI). Quality was assessed using the DISCERN instrument. Spearman's correlation between quality and readability was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 79 websites met the inclusion criteria. The mean and 95% confidence interval for the FRES, FKGL, SMOG, GFI and DISCERN scores were 46.31 (42.94-49.68), 12.00 (11.27-12.73), 10.70 (10.16-11.23), 14.62 (13.85-15.39) and 2.90 (2.69-3.11), respectively. Significant negative correlation was noted between the DISCERN and FRES (rs=-0.500; p<0.05). DISCUSSION: Online information on anosmia is written above the recommended reading age guidance in the UK, and has moderate deficiencies in quality. As a result, the information may be used inappropriately and could result in worse health outcomes. We recommend that patients are directed to websites produced by health providers or nonprofit organisations that develop material for patient health education. CONCLUSIONS: Online information on anosmia is of low readability and moderate quality. Healthcare professionals should direct patients towards high-quality resources written for the layperson.

Comparison of prevalence and evolution of COVID-19 olfactory disorders in patients infected by D614 (wild) and B.1.1.7. Alpha variant: a brief report.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence and the evolution of olfactory disorders (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients infected during the first and the second European waves. METHODS: From March 2020 to October 2020, COVID-19 patients with OD were recruited and followed over the 12-month post-infection. The following data were collected: demographic, treatments, vaccination status, and olfactory function. Olfaction was assessed with the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire (ODQ), and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. Outcomes were compared between patients of the first wave (group 1: wild/D614G virus) and the second wave (group 2: B.1.1.7. Alpha variant) at 1-, 3- and 12-month post-infection. RESULTS: Sixty patients completed the evaluations accounting for 33 and 27 patients in group 1 and 2, respectively. The 1-month TDI score (23.7 ± 5.3) was significantly lower in group 2 compared to group 1 (29.8 ± 8.7; p = 0.017). Proportion of normosmic patients at 1-month post-infection was significantly higher in group 1 compared to group 2 (p = 0.009). TDI scores only significantly increased from 1- to 3-month post-infection in anosmic and hyposmic patients. Focusing on There was a negative association between the 1-month ODQ and the 1-month TDI (rs = - 0.493; p = 0.012). ODQ was a significant predictor of TDI scores at 3- and 12-month post-infection. The 12-month prevalence of parosmia was 60.6% in group 1 and 42.4% in group 2, respectively. There was no significant influence of oral corticosteroid treatment, adherence to an olfactory training and vaccination status on the olfactory outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients of the second wave (Alpha B.1.1.7. variant) reported significant higher proportion of psychophysical test abnormalities at 1-month post-infection than patients infected during the first wave (D614G virus).

Platelet-rich plasma injection in the olfactory clefts of COVID-19 patients with long-term olfactory dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection into the olfactory clefts of COVID-19 patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: From March 2022 to July 2022, COVID-19 patients with persistent OD were consecutively recruited to benefit from PRP injection into the olfactory clefts. Patient pain, annoyance, time of procedure, and adverse events were evaluated. Olfactory function was evaluated at baseline and 2-month post-injection with the olfactory disorder questionnaire (ODQ) and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients with anosmia (N = 30), hyposmia (N = 40), or parosmia (N = 17) with a mean OD duration of 15.7 months completed the evaluations. The PRP injection was successfully performed in all patients with a mean procedure time of 18.4 ± 3.4 min. The adverse events included transient epistaxis (N = 31), parosmia related to xylocaine spray (N = 10), and vasovagal episode (N = 2). The injection procedure was evaluated as somewhat or moderately painful by 41 (47%) and 22 (25%) patients, respectively. Thirty-seven patients were assessed after 2 months post-injection. The mean ODQ and TDI scores significantly improved from baseline to 2-month post-injection (p < 0.01). The olfactory improvement occurred after a mean of 3.6 ± 1.9 weeks. CONCLUSION: The injection of PRP into the olfactory clefts is safe and associated with adequate patient-reported outcomes. The findings of this preliminary study suggest possible efficacy on subjective and psychophysical evaluations, but future randomized controlled studies are needed to determine the superiority of PRP injection over placebo.

Visual Analog Scale and Olfactory Objective Tests in Hyposmia Patients: Is There a Link?

Introduction Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is often a devaluated sensorial affection. The objective evaluation of this dysfunction does not evaluate its compromise in patients' daily life. It is unclear to what extent there is a correlation between the objective evaluation of OD and patient-reported impairment. Objective We aim to search if Sniffin Sticks® correlates with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of Hyposmia Symptoms, and therefore if it is a useful method for clinical use. Methods A prospective study was carried out to evaluate and compare consecutive patients who had olfactory impairment due to COVID-19 that were referred to an otolaryngology office. The variables evaluated were gender, age, co-morbidities, and olfactory thresholds (measured according to Sniffin Sticks®). Patients were also enquired about their sense of impairment according to VAS from 1 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics 26). Normal distribution was checked using both skewness and kurtosis and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. Pearson correlation test was used to seek a correlation between VAS and olfactory thresholds. All reported p-values are two-tailed, with a p-value ≤ 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Results Our sample of 47 patients was composed of 30 females (63.8%) and 17 females (36.2%). We found a mean variation between olfactory thresholds before and after the intervention of 3.91±2.466, and an average improvement of 2.29±2.93 in the visual analog scale for subjective evaluation of olfactory impairment. According to the Pearson correlation test, with 95% confidence, there is evidence to claim a moderate association (0.512) between an improvement in olfactory thresholds and VAS (p=0.05). Conclusions There was a moderate correlation between ratings and measures of olfactory function. On an individual basis, there were remarkable differences between measures and ratings of olfactory function. VAS should be considered in the evaluation of the hyposmic patient, due to its simplicity and quick applicability.

Safety of day-case endoscopic sinus surgery in England: An observational study using an administrative dataset.

INTRODUCTION: As elective surgical services recover from the COVID-19 pandemic a movement towards day-case surgery may reduce waiting lists. However, evidence is needed to show that day-case surgery is safe for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of day-case ESS in England. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of administrative data. METHODS: We extracted data from the Hospital Episodes Statistics database for the 5 years from 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2019. Patients undergoing elective ESS procedures aged ≥17 years were included. Exclusion criteria included malignant neoplasm, complex systemic disease and trans-sphenoidal pituitary surgery. The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days post-discharge. Multilevel, multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to compare outcomes for those operated on as day-cases and those with an overnight stay after adjusting for demographic, frailty, comorbidity and procedural covariates. RESULTS: Data were available for 49 223 patients operated on across 129 NHS hospital trusts. In trusts operating on more than 50 patients in the study period, rates of day-case surgery varied from 20.6% to 100%. Nationally, rates of day-case surgery increased from 64.0% in the financial year 2014/2015 to 78.7% in 2018/2019. Day-case patients had lower rates of 30-day emergency readmission (odds ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.81). Outcomes for patients operated on in trusts with ≥80% day-case rates compared with patients operated on in trusts with <50% rates of day-case surgery were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the view that ESS can safely be performed as day-case surgery in most cases, although it will not be suitable for all patients. There appears to be scope to increase rates of day-case ESS in some hospital trusts in England.

Effectiveness of olfactory training in COVID-19 patients with olfactory dysfunction: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate effectiveness of olfactory training (OT) in COVID-19 patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: From March 2020 to March 2022, COVID-19 patients with OD were prospectively followed in three European medical centers for a period of 18 months. A standardized OT protocol were recommended to patients. Patient-reported outcome questionnaires and psychophysical evaluations were used to evaluate olfaction at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months after the start of OT. The evolution of olfactory outcome was compared according to the adherence to the OT protocol. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients completed the evaluations. Thirty-two patients fully adhered to the OT, while 25 did not adhere. The psychophysical scores significantly improved from baseline to 6-month post-infection in both groups. In the OT group, the psychophysical scores continued to significantly improve from 6 to 12 months after the start of OT (p = 0.032). The mean duration of OT was 15.4 weeks. The mean delay of patient recovery perception was comparable between groups (27.4 weeks). The occurrence of cacosmia (35.1%) and parosmia (43.9%) throughout the follow-up period was comparable between groups. There proportion of phantosmia was higher in training (34.4%) compared with no-OT (16.0%; p = 0.007) group. The baseline Sniffin'Sticks tests was positively associated with the 6-month Sniffin'Sticks tests (rs = 0.685; p < 0.001) and negatively associated with the time of recovery (rs = - 0.369; p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The adherence to an OT protocol was associated with better mid-term improvement of psychophysical scores. Future large-cohort randomized-controlled studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of OT in COVID-19 patients.

Drug-induced olfactory and gustatory dysfunction: Analysis of FDA adverse events reporting system.

OBJECTIVES: With the COVID-19 pandemic, there is growing interest and research in olfactory and gustatory dysfunction (OGD). Drug-induced dysfunction is an often overlooked etiology. While several medications include smell or taste disturbance as a side effect, there are no publications describing which medications are most frequently implicated. We aim to describe the patterns of these adverse drug reactions (ADRs) using the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS). METHODS: The FAERS database was queried from 2011 to 2021 for terms describing ADRs related to OGD. Terms included anosmia, hyposmia, olfactory test abnormal, olfactory nerve disorder, hallucination olfactory, parosmia, ageusia, hypogeusia, dysgeusia, and taste disorder. We identified the top reported medications associated with general smell dysfunction, general taste dysfunction, reduced smell, and altered smell. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2021, 16,091 ADRs were reported with OGD, of which13,641 (84.8%) and 2,450 (15.2%) were associated with gustatory and olfactory reactions, respectively. Zinc products (370 reports) and fluticasone propionate (214) were most commonly associated with olfactory dysfunction, specifically reduced olfaction. Varenicline (24) and fluticasone propionate (23) were most commonly associated with altered smell. Lenalidomide (490) and sunitinib (468) were most commonly associated with gustatory dysfunction. Antineoplastic and immunomodulating medications accounted for 21.6% and 36.3% of olfactory and gustatory ADRs, respectively. Among this category, immunoglobulin drugs were the most commonly associated with OGD ADRs. CONCLUSION: Gustatory dysfunction is more commonly reported ADR compared with olfactory dysfunction. Immunologic/rheumatologic medications are the leading culprit of reported OGD. With increasing numbers of patients presenting to otolaryngologists for OGD, it is important to consider drug-induced etiology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Telemedicine as an environmental ally - The social, financial, and environmental impact of virtual care in the otolaryngology clinic.

PURPOSE: Synchronous virtual care rapidly expanded worldwide amid the COVID-19 pandemic to provide remote medical assessment, minimizing contact and disease transmission risk. Despite its benefits, such an abrupt expansion has shed light on the need to address patients' level of satisfaction with this service delivery. The purpose of this study was to investigate patients' satisfaction, travel cost, productivity loss, and CO2 emissions involved with synchronous virtual care and in-person assessments in rhinology and sleep apnea clinics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective comparative study included patients managed via virtual care, or in-person clinic visit at St. Joseph Hospital, London, Canada, from December/2020 to April/2021, with rhinology pathologies or sleep apnoea. Patient satisfaction questionnaire (PSQ-18) scores were assessed. The overall scores of respondents were recorded including cost implications. RESULTS: A total of 329 patients were invited, 28.5 % responded (n = 93). 33 virtual care (age 48 ± 6), and 60 in-person (age 51 ± 19). There was no statistical significance in PSQ-18 scores. However, under a diagnosis-based subgroup analysis, allergic rhinitis patients on virtual care presented a significantly lower PSQ-18 scores on the general satisfaction (3.28 vs. 4.25, p = 0.04). The time spent with the doctor was directly correlated with age for patients seen in-person (r = 0.27; p = 0.037). The estimated loss of productivity for the Virtual care group was CAD 12, patients assessed in-person presented an average loss of productivity about six times higher (CAD 74 ± 40). CONCLUSIONS: Overall patients' satisfaction did not depend on whether they were seen virtually or in-person. However, time spent with the doctor contributed to higher satisfaction levels, but only among older patients who were seen in person. Nonetheless, allergic rhinitis patients seemed less satisfied with the virtual care option. Virtual care demonstrates economic benefits.

Septoplasty Training During the COVID-19 Era: Development and Validation of a Novel Low-Cost Simulation Model.

Objective: In a context of increasingly limited surgical exposition, enhanced by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic context, the objective of this article is to explain the development of a novel low-cost and simple replication animal-based septoplasty training model for otolaryngology residents, to assess its face and construct validity, and to validate a specific rating scale for each task. Study Design: Experimental study. Setting: Surgical simulation laboratory. Methods: Septoplasty experts divided the procedure into key tasks. A simulator model to perform tasks was developed using pig ears to imitate human nasal septum cartilage, and a Specific Rating Scale was constructed. Trainees and faculty performed all tasks in the model. The participants were videotaped, and operative time, hand movements, and path length were recorded using a motion sensor device. Two blinded experts evaluated the videos with Global and Specific Rating Scales. All participants answered a satisfaction survey. Results: Fifteen subjects were recruited (7 trainees and 8 faculty). Significantly higher Global Rating Scale score, shorter operative time and path length, and fewer hand movements were observed in the faculty group. The satisfaction survey showed high applicability to a real scenario (mean score of 4.6 out of 5). Specific Rating Scale showed construct and concurrent validity and high reliability. Conclusion: This simulation model and its specific rating scale can be accurately used as a validated surgical assessment tool for endonasal septoplasty skills. Its low cost and simple replicability make it a potentially useful tool in any otolaryngology surgical training program.

Injection of Platelet Rich Plasma in the Olfactory Cleft for COVID-19 Patients With Persistent Olfactory Dysfunction: Description of the Technique.

In this paper, we described technique of platelet rich plasma injection into the olfactory cleft in a 22-year-old female with 24-month post-COVID-19 anosmia. The technique starts with the blood extraction and the isolation of PRP through a 10-min centrifugation. The supernatant was injected in nasal regions after a local anesthesia through a 0° rigid optic. Several points of .2-.5 mL were performed in the nasal septum in regard of the head of the middle turbine and in the head of the middle turbine in both sides. The baseline threshold, discrimination, and identification scores were 1, 8, and 0, and the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire score was 51, respectively. The injection of PRP in olfactory cleft was done without complication and mild pain. The patient perception of recovery of smell sense occurred at 3-week post-injection. From this time, the smell sense progressively improved to the 2-month consultation. At 2-month post-injection, the TDI scores reached 16, 16, and 16 (48), while the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire was 73. The injection of PRP into the olfactory cleft appears to be a safe and easiness new approach that may improve the recovery of smell sense. Future controlled studies are needed.

Multi-level comparison of congenital and acquired anosmia

Introduction: Anosmia is the loss of the ability to detect one or more smells which can affect 3–20% of the population. The disorder divides into two types: congenital and acquired. Aim: The objective of the study is to demonstrate the differences in social adaptation, quality of life and clinical features between patients with congenital and acquired anosmia. Material and methods: Survey that contained questions about the quality of life, taste disorders, genesis of anosmia, perception from the trigeminal nerve, etc. was provided at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic thus the vast majority of patients did not suffer from COVID-19 at that time. People affected by hyposmia were removed from our research. A level of P < 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: A total of 331 patients completed the survey. Patients with acquired anosmia rated their quality of life lower than patients with congenital anosmia in EQ-VAS. As many as 44.6% of people with acquired anosmia claimed that their quality of life decreased mainly in the aspect of feeling pleasure, whereas 40.7% of people with congenital anosmia claimed that none of the aspects of their life decreased. Taste disorders rarely occur in the group of people with congenital anosmia in comparison to the group of people with acquired anosmia (11.5% vs 38.7%). Trigeminal nerve dysfunction two times more often accompanies acquired anosmia than congenital anosmia. Conclusion: People with acquired anosmia tolerate anosmia worse than people with congenital anosmia. Congenital anosmia significantly differs from acquired anosmia. More research in the field of anosmia needs to be conducted. Copyright: Polish Society of Otorhinolaryngologists Head and Neck Surgeons. Published by Index Copernicus Sp. z o.o.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection (COVID-19) and Rhinologic Manifestation: Narrative Review.

Patients with severe pneumonia of unknown etiology presented in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. A novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), was isolated from the respiratory tracts of these patients. The World Health Organization (WHO) defined respiratory diseases due to SARS-CoV-2 infection as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Many researchers have reported that the nasal cavity is an important initial route for SARS-CoV-2 infection and that the spike protein of this virus binds to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) on epithelial cell surfaces. Therefore, COVID-19 is thought to significantly affect nasal symptoms and various rhinological diseases. In this review, we summarize the association between COVID-19 and various rhinological diseases, such as olfactory dysfunction, rhinosinusitis, and allergic rhinitis.

Five-item odorant test as an indicator of COVID-19 infection in a general population.

PURPOSE: To analyze the utility of a 5-item odorant test (U-Smell-It™) in determining COVID-19 status in COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive and -negative participants. METHODS: Symptoms, COVID-19 status, and 5-item odorant test results were collected from general population COVID-19 testing in Louisiana (n = 1042), and routine COVID-19 screening of healthcare workers in a nursing home in Florida (n = 278) (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04431908). RESULTS: In the general population COVID-19 testing site, a cutoff point of ≤2 (0, 1, or 2 correct answers out of 5) achieved sensitivity of 40.0% (95% CI: 26.4%-54.8%) and specificity of 89.2% (95% CI: 87.1%-91.1%) in detecting COVID-19 infection. Within this population, analysis of individuals with no self-reported loss of smell/taste and runny/stuffy nose resulted in sensitivity of 38.1% (95% CI: 18.1%-61.6%) and specificity of 92.3% (95% CI: 89.1%-93.4%), while analysis of individuals with self-reported loss of smell/taste and/or runny/stuffy nose resulted in sensitivity of 41.4% (95% CI: 23.5%-61.1%) and specificity of 82.4% (95% CI: 77.7%-86.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The quick turnaround time, low cost, reduced resource requirement, and ease of administering odorant tests provide many advantages as an indicator sign to help flag a molecular diagnostic COVID-19 test with relatively high specificity. Our results suggest that this odorant testing for olfactory dysfunction may be a viable option in pre-screening COVID-19 infection. This tool has the potential to allow for continued monitoring and surveillance, while helping mitigate surges of COVID-19 variants. Further investigation is warranted to observe the extent to which odorant testing might be applied in a serial testing scenario.

Corticosteroid Use in Otolaryngology: Current Considerations During the COVID-19 Era.

OBJECTIVE: To offer pragmatic, evidence-informed advice on administering corticosteroids in otolaryngology during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, considering therapeutic efficacy, potential adverse effects, susceptibility to COVID-19, and potential effects on efficacy of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, and guideline databases. REVIEW METHODS: Guideline search strategies, supplemented by database searches on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), idiopathic facial nerve paralysis (Bell's palsy), sinonasal polyposis, laryngotracheal disorders, head and neck oncology, and pediatric otolaryngology, prioritizing systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and COVID-19-specific findings. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic corticosteroids (SCSs) reduce long-term morbidity in individuals with SSNHL and Bell's palsy, reduce acute laryngotracheal edema, and have benefit in perioperative management for some procedures. Topical or locally injected corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. SCSs have not shown long-term benefit for sinonasal disorders. SCSs are not a contraindication to vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noted that these vaccines are safe for immunocompromised patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: SCS use for SSNHL, Bell's palsy, laryngotracheal edema, and perioperative care should follow prepandemic standards. Local or topical corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. Whether SCSs attenuate response to vaccination against COVID-19 or increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. Immunosuppression may lower vaccine efficacy, so immunocompromised patients should adhere to recommended infection control practices. COVID-19 vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson vaccines is safe for immunocompromised patients.

One year into the COVID-19 pandemic: What do we know so far from studies assessing risk and mitigation of droplet aerosolisation during endonasal surgery? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: As we pass the anniversary of the declaration of a global pandemic by the World Health Organisation, it invites us to reflect upon the inescapable changes that coronavirus has wrought upon ENT and, in particular, rhinological practice. As it remains unclear when we will emerge from the shadow of COVID-19, a critical analysis of the evidence base on both the assessment and mitigation of risk is vital for ENT departments worldwide. This article presents a systematic review of the literature examining articles which consider either the quantification of risk or strategies to mitigate risk specifically in the setting of rhinological surgery. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. RESULTS: The literature search yielded a total of 3406 returns with 24 articles meeting eligibility criteria. A narrative synthesis stratified results into two broad themes: (1) those which made an assessment as to the aerosolisation of droplets during sinus surgery, further sub-divided into work which considered macroscopically visible droplets and that which considered smaller particles; (2) and those studies which examined the mitigation of this risk. CONCLUSION: Studies considering the aerosolisation of both droplets and smaller particles suggest endonasal surgery carries significant risk. While results both highlight a range of innovative adjunctive strategies and support suction as an important intervention to reduce aerosolisation, appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) should be considered mandatory for all healthcare professionals involved in rhinological surgery. Studies have demonstrated that close adherence to PPE use is effective in preventing COVID-19 infection.