Mediastinal abscess revealed by computed tomography after pharyngeal fish-bone impaction.

Fishbone impactions in the upper aerodigestive tract are frequent but rarely cause serious complications when recognized and treated early. In this report, we describe the case of a patient that sought medical attention as late as 2 weeks after the fishbone impaction. A 52-year-old male was presented with fever, odynophagia and a toxic appearance. CT scan revealed a large cervicomediastinal abscess. The patient was immediately started on large-spectrum antibiotics, treated by surgical drainage, and recovered uneventfully. This case report highlights the occurrence of severe complications of upper digestive tract fishbone impaction and the usefulness of a preoperative CT scanner in this context.

Assessment of olfactory fluctuations in a clinical context.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether olfactory fluctuations (OF) are pronounced in patients with sinonasal olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: The retrospective investigation included patients aged 18 years or older, who consulted a tertiary referral center for olfactory loss. Patients with normal smell function were excluded. Patients answered a structured questionnaire about their olfactory symptoms, with specific questions related to the presence of OF and its average frequency, amplitude, duration, time since most recent OF, and associated symptoms of self-reported OF. Patients also underwent clinical evaluation including a structured medical history and physical examination including nasal endoscopy. In addition, we assessed orthonasal olfactory function using Sniffin' Sticks, and gustatory function using "taste sprays". RESULTS: Participants included 131 men and 205 women (n = 336), aged 18 to 86 years (mean 50, SD 16). Patient-reported fluctuations occurred most frequently in sinonasal (38%), idiopathic (29%), and postviral (29%) OD. Amplitude of OF was highest in postviral OD (p = 0.009). Average frequency, duration, and the time since the most recent fluctuation were not significantly different between groups (all p's > 0.42). Odor discrimination (p = 0.002) and identification (p = 0.017) scores were higher among those individuals with OF. CONCLUSION: Amplitude of OF may help distinguish postviral from other causes of OD, especially in patients presenting with equivocal symptoms of sinonasal disease.

Systemic corticosteroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related smell dysfunction: an international view.

The frequent association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and olfactory dysfunction is creating an unprecedented demand for a treatment of the olfactory loss. Systemic corticosteroids have been considered as a therapeutic option. However, based on current literature, we call for caution using these treatments in early COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction because: (1) evidence supporting their usefulness is weak; (2) the rate of spontaneous recovery of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction is high; and (3) corticosteroids have well-known potential adverse effects. We encourage randomized placebo-controlled trials investigating the efficacy of systemic steroids in this indication and strongly emphasize to initially consider smell training, which is supported by a robust evidence base and has no known side effects.

Clinical Olfactory Working Group consensus statement on the treatment of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract viruses are the second most common cause of olfactory dysfunction. As we learn more about the effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with the recognition that olfactory dysfunction is a key symptom of this disease process, there is a greater need than ever for evidence-based management of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to provide an evidence-based practical guide to the management of PIOD (including post-coronavirus 2019 cases) for both primary care practitioners and hospital specialists. METHODS: A systematic review of the treatment options available for the management of PIOD was performed. The written systematic review was then circulated among the members of the Clinical Olfactory Working Group for their perusal before roundtable expert discussion of the treatment options. The group also undertook a survey to determine their current clinical practice with regard to treatment of PIOD. RESULTS: The search resulted in 467 citations, of which 107 articles were fully reviewed and analyzed for eligibility; 40 citations fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 11 of which were randomized controlled trials. In total, 15 of the articles specifically looked at PIOD whereas the other 25 included other etiologies for olfactory dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: The Clinical Olfactory Working Group members made an overwhelming recommendation for olfactory training; none recommended monocycline antibiotics. The diagnostic role of oral steroids was discussed; some group members were in favor of vitamin A drops. Further research is needed to confirm the place of other therapeutic options.

Recent Smell Loss Is the Best Predictor of COVID-19 Among Individuals With Recent Respiratory Symptoms.

In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using 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 univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both 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 univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 < OR < 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.

Olfactory Fluctuation Revisited.

OBJECTIVES: Many patients complain about olfactory fluctuation (OF), which is a symptom commonly attributed to sinonasal disease. Data-based evidence for its association with sinonasal disease is scarce. The aim of the study is to identify explanatory variables associated with OF and to analyze its predictive value regarding sinonasal disease. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective study based on patients with olfactory dysfunction. METHODS: We analyzed data from 482 patients attending the smell and taste outpatient clinic with full psychophysical workup and structured questions regarding their symptoms. The questionnaire included items on OF and chronic nasal symptoms. Clinical investigators filled out the second part of this questionnaire that included information about nasal endoscopy, psychophysical tests of orthonasal olfaction (Sniffin' Sticks), retronasal olfaction, and putative etiology of olfactory dysfunction. RESULTS: OF was more prevalent in sinonasal disease (42.4%) compared to other putative etiologies of olfactory dysfunction such as postinfectious (28%) or posttraumatic (11.7%) (X2 [5, n = 440] = 24.98; P < .0001). OF was strongly associated with Sniffin' Sticks score categories (anosmia, hyposmia, normosmia) (X2 [2, n = 424] = 39.21; P < .0001; Cramer's V = 0.30; P < .0001) and presence of "chronic nasal symptoms" (X2 [1, n = 437] = 22.71; P < .0001; Cramer's V = 0.23; P < .0001). The accuracy in predicting putative sinonasal disease etiology when OF was present depended strongly on the clinical context. CONCLUSION: Olfactory fluctuation is a symptom mostly but not exclusively associated with sinonasal disease, elevated Sniffin' Sticks test scores, and is frequently accompanied by other nasal complaints. Its presence is valuable information for clinicians to be integrated into the clinical context when doing patients' workup. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 130:2442-2447, 2020.

The best COVID-19 predictor is recent smell loss: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-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. METHODS: This 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. RESULTS: Both 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 no significant 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. CONCLUSIONS: As 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 (10

Circadian anosmia: A rare clinical presentation.

We report the case of a 27-year-old female who presented with a peculiar story of anosmia fluctuating in a circadian manner. Olfactory function appeared an hour after breakfast, was normal during daytime, and disappeared in the early evening. Imaging confirmed chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Initial systemic, followed by topical steroid treatment, rapidly and sustainably reversed this condition. The olfactory fluctuation paralleled the endogenous steroid production. This suggests that slight congestion changes in a chronically inflamed nasal mucosa may have been sufficient to induce this circadian anosmia. The importance of identifying fluctuation of olfactory function as a sign of CRS is emphasized and discussed. Laryngoscope, 128:1537-1539, 2018.

SMELL-S and SMELL-R: Olfactory tests not influenced by odor-specific insensitivity or prior olfactory experience.

Smell dysfunction is a common and underdiagnosed medical condition that can have serious consequences. It is also an early biomarker of neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's disease, where olfactory deficits precede detectable memory loss. Clinical tests that evaluate the sense of smell face two major challenges. First, human sensitivity to individual odorants varies significantly, so test results may be unreliable in people with low sensitivity to a test odorant but an otherwise normal sense of smell. Second, prior familiarity with odor stimuli can bias smell test performance. We have developed nonsemantic tests for olfactory sensitivity (SMELL-S) and olfactory resolution (SMELL-R) that use mixtures of odorants that have unfamiliar smells. The tests can be self-administered by healthy individuals with minimal training and show high test-retest reliability. Because SMELL-S uses odor mixtures rather than a single molecule, odor-specific insensitivity is averaged out, and the test accurately distinguished people with normal and dysfunctional smell. SMELL-R is a discrimination test in which the difference between two stimulus mixtures can be altered stepwise. This is an advance over current discrimination tests, which ask subjects to discriminate monomolecular odorants whose difference in odor cannot be quantified. SMELL-R showed significantly less bias in scores between North American and Taiwanese subjects than conventional semantically based smell tests that need to be adapted to different languages and cultures. Based on these proof-of-principle results in healthy individuals, we predict that SMELL-S and SMELL-R will be broadly effective in diagnosing smell dysfunction.

Chronic maxillary rhinosinusitis of dental origin: a systematic review of 674 patient cases.

Objectives. The aim of this systematic review is to study the causes of odontogenic chronic maxillary rhinosinusitis (CMRS), the average age of the patients, the distribution by sex, and the teeth involved. Materials and Methods. We performed an EMBASE-, Cochrane-, and PubMed-based review of all of the described cases of odontogenic CMRS from January 1980 to January 2013. Issues of clinical relevance, such as the primary aetiology and the teeth involved, were evaluated for each case. Results. From the 190 identified publications, 23 were selected for a total of 674 patients following inclusion criteria. According to these data, the main cause of odontogenic CMRS is iatrogenic, accounting for 65.7% of the cases. Apical periodontal pathologies (apical granulomas, odontogenic cysts, and apical periodontitis) follow them and account for 25.1% of the cases. The most commonly involved teeth are the first and second molars. Conclusion. Odontogenic CMRS is a common disease that must be suspected whenever a patient undergoing dental treatment presents unilateral maxillary chronic rhinosinusitis.