ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: Current literature has confirmed the benefits of sialendoscopy for the treatment of juvenile recurrent parotitis (JRP). However, this procedure is often performed unilaterally, although the disease can affect both sides. This article investigated the clinical course of the contralateral parotid (CL) gland in children requiring unilateral sialendoscopy with the goal of clarifying the necessity of primary bilateral sialendoscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study in a tertiary center. METHODS: Over an eight-year period, 77 children with JRP underwent unilateral sialendoscopy. We observed the clinical course of the CL parotid over a minimum follow-up period of 24 months. New episodes of sialadenitis were recorded on both sides along with the need for a second sialendoscopy. These data were correlated with the preoperative symptoms of the contralateral side as well as ultrasound (U/S) findings at baseline assessment. RESULTS: In total, six children required sialendoscopy on the CL side (7.8%), 62 children remained asymptomatic or with scarce swellings (80.5%), and nine children improved (11.7%). The preoperative U/S findings on the CL side positively correlated with the number of postoperative swellings. The proportion of children needing CL sialendoscopy was higher (21.4%) among children needing a second sialendoscopy on the operated side. CONCLUSIONS: In the long term, the vast majority of children needing unilateral sialendoscopy do not require similar treatment of the CL parotid gland. However, a history of bilateral swellings along with U/S findings of parenchymal disorganization on the CL side significantly increases the risk of needing further sialendoscopy at a later time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:1404-1409, 2021.
Subject(s)
Endoscopy/methods , Parotid Gland/surgery , Parotitis/surgery , Reoperation/statistics & numerical data , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Male , Parotid Gland/diagnostic imaging , Parotitis/diagnostic imaging , Prospective Studies , Sialography/methods , Treatment Outcome , Ultrasonography/methodsABSTRACT
BackgroundCOVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19. MethodsThis preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. ResultsBoth C19+ and C19-groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean{+/-}SD, C19+: -82.5{+/-}27.2 points; C19-: -59.8{+/-}37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for [~]50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset. ConclusionsAs smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings [≤]2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4
ABSTRACT
Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, generally lacked quantitative measurements, were mostly restricted to data from single countries. Here, we report the development, implementation and initial results of a multi-lingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in three distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, 8 other, ages 19-79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change {+/-}100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (-79.7 {+/-} 28.7, mean {+/-} SD), taste (-69.0 {+/-} 32.6), and chemesthetic (-37.3 {+/-} 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell, but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms.