| Literature DB >> 35004126 |
Tara J Wu1, Alice C Yu1, Jivianne T Lee1.
Abstract
Purpose of Review: Olfactory dysfunction is a frequent complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This review presents the current literature regarding the management of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction (PCOD). Recent Findings: A systematic review of the literature using the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for the following keywords, "Covid-19," "SARS-CoV-2," "anosmia," "olfactory," "treatment," and "management" was performed. While most cases of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction resolve spontaneously within 2 weeks of symptom onset, patients with symptoms that persist past 2 weeks require medical management. The intervention with the greatest degree of supporting evidence is olfactory training, wherein patients are repeatedly exposed to potent olfactory stimuli. To date, no large-scale randomized clinical trials exist that examine the efficacy of pharmacologic therapies for PCOD. Limited clinical trials and prospective controlled trials suggest intranasal corticosteroids and oral corticosteroids may alleviate symptoms. Summary: Olfactory training should be initiated as soon as possible for patients with PCOD. Patients may benefit from a limited intranasal or oral corticosteroid course. Further research on effective pharmacologic therapies for PCOD is required to manage the growing number of patients with this condition. © This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply 2021.Entities:
Keywords: Anosmia; COVID-19; Olfactory dysfunction; Olfactory training
Year: 2022 PMID: 35004126 PMCID: PMC8723803 DOI: 10.1007/s40521-021-00297-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Treat Options Allergy
Studies comparing effectiveness of olfactory training
| Study/year | Level of evidence | Study design | Results | Conclusions | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denis et al. 2021 [ | 1B | - 548 patients with at least 1 month of PCOD were exposed to OT twice daily assisted by a web application displaying pictures correlated with the odorants for at least 7 days | - 64% of patients showed a clinically significant improvement after a mean olfactory training of 28 days - Patients who trained for longer than 28 days experienced better outcomes - Hyposmic patients exhibited improved outcomes after OT compared to anosmic patients | - OT was effective in most patients with PCOD in clinically improving OF - Training for longer than 28 days may lead to improved outcomes - Hyposmic patients had improved prognosis than anosmic patients | |
| Hura et al. 2020 [ | 1a | - Systematic review of OT outcomes among patients with PVOD - 10 studies analyzed, including 2 large RCTs (level 1b), 2 small RCTs (level 2b), 3 prospective cohort studies (level 3), and 3 prospective/retrospective case series (level 4 studies) | - OT resulted in improved TDI and UPSIT scores - Minimal adverse effects (inconvenience of daily training) were seen | - OT for a minimum of 12 weeks is a recommendation for treatment of PVOD. OT is an inexpensive option with minimal/no harm and high benefit | |
| Kattar et al. 2021 [ | 2a | - Systematic review of OT outcomes among patients with PVOD - 4 studies analyzed, including 2 RCTs (level 1b) and 2 prospective non-randomized controlled studies (level 2b) | - Nearly threefold greater odds of achieving a clinically significant improvement in TDI scores among patients undergoing OT compared to controls (OR 2.77; 95% CI 1.67–4.58), even after accounting for variability in OT protocols among the 4 studies - Longer durations of OT (up to 56 weeks), along with shorter durations of symptoms prior to initiation of OT (< 12 months), were associated with greater improvements in olfactory function | - OT for a minimum of 12 weeks improved olfactory function, among patients with PVOD - The strengths of OT included ease of implementation and minimal adverse effects - The limitations of OT included a lack of consensus regarding the optimal duration of therapy, dependence on high patient compliance (sustained daily training for months), and long-term effectiveness of therapy (> 56 weeks) | |
| Addison et al. 2021 [ | 2A | - Meta-analysis of 40 studies, including 11 RCTs investigating PIOD | - 3 meta-analyses of RCTs, cohort studies, and prospective controlled studies showed long-term (> 32 weeks) and high-concentration deodorants improved olfactory function among patients who had OT | - OT had significant evidence of benefit for patients with generalized anosmia | |
| Hummel et al. 2017 [ | 5 | -Position paper | -Review of 6 studies demonstrated that OT led to improve OF after 12–36 weeks of treatment, with longer durations of treatment and higher odor concentrations resulting in greater improvements in OF -OT was postulated to increase regenerative capacity of olfactory neurons as a result of repeated odorant exposure | -Given low cost and high safety of OT, it was recommended in patients with OD of several etiologies | |
CI confidence interval
OD olfactory dysfunction
OF olfactory function
OR odds ratio
OT olfactory training
PCOD post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction
PIOD post-infectious olfactory dysfunction
PVOD post-viral olfactory dysfunction
RCT randomized controlled trial
TDI score threshold, discrimination, and identification score
UPSIT University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test
Studies comparing effectiveness of intranasal corticosteroid sprays
| Study/year | Level of evidence | Study design | Results | Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abdelalim et al. 2021 [ | 1b | - RCT of 50 patients with PCOD who underwent daily MFNS with OT, compared to 50 patients who underwent OT alone, for 3 weeks - Olfactory function was assessed using the VAS. Duration of anosmia was recorded from onset until full recovery. Recovery rates were recorded - Follow-up time was 3 weeks | - VAS smell scores significantly improved in both groups by the 3rd week of treatment ( - The average time until complete recovery in the MFNS + OT group was 26.4 days, compared to 26.2 days in the OT alone group ( - 62% of patients who underwent MFNS + OT completely recovered their sense of smell after 3 weeks, compared to 52% of patients who underwent OT alone ( | - Adding MFNS in the treatment of PCOD offers no superiority benefit over OT, regarding VAS smell scores, duration of anosmia, and recovery rates |
| Hopkins et al. 2021 [ | 5 | - Expert consensus statement based on literature review conducted via Medline and Cochrane databases | - Consensus of 15 experts agreeing that topical intranasal corticosteroids might aid in PCOD | - ICS is recommended in patients with anosmia lasting longer than 2 weeks |
| Singh et al. 2021[ | 3B | - Prospective interventional study of 120 patients with PCOD - OF tested at days 1 and 5 after positive RT-PCR - 60 patients given 2 sprays fluticasone every day for 5 days | - Symptoms of anosmia and dysgeusia improved for patients receiving ICS over those in the control group ( | - In the acute setting, ICS may hasten recovery; however, it is unclear whether these patients would have recovered OF eventually or whether early intervention prevented long-term anosmia given lack of long-term follow-up |
| Hura et al. 2020 [ | 3a | - Systematic review of PVOD undergoing treatment with ICS - Studies analyzed included 1 RCT (level 1b), 1 case series (level 4), and 1 retrospective review (level 4) | - Some patients (25–58%) with PVOD demonstrated mildly improved olfactory scores after use of ICS - Minimal side effects (local irritation, epistaxis) were seen with ICS use - The RCT included 23 patients who were initially treated with a 10-day course of OCS + ICS, after which they were randomized to continue ICS versus placebo versus control. All patients experienced improvement in olfactory scores after the initial 10-day treatment period. Given co-treatment, this improvement may not be attributed to ICS alone. Patients taking ICS compared to placebo or control showed no difference in olfactory outcomes at 6-month follow-up -The level 4 studies lacked control groups; therefore, it was difficult to determine whether recovery of olfaction was due to spontaneous recovery or the effect of treatment | - Short-term ICS use is an option for management of PVOD due to the mild benefit seen in some patients and overall low risk of therapy. If there is no initial improvement after ICS use, then there is limited evidence suggesting benefit with chronic use |
| Addison et al. 2021 [ | 2A | - Meta-analysis of 40 studies, including 11 RCTs investigating PIOD | - 1 prospective case series showing benefit of ICS in 2 of 8 patients - 1 prospective study showing intranasal injection leading to 50% improvement - 1 observational study using topical steroids with 58% self-reporting improvement in symptoms - Studies examined were mostly conducted on PVOD patients before COVID-19 pandemic and may not be specific to PCOD | - ICS may alleviate symptoms in patients without spontaneous improvement in olfaction - Kaiteki position in which patients lie on the side with their head tilted may have more efficacy by allowing nasal drops to reach the olfactory cleft |
ICS intranasal corticosteroid spray
MFNS mometasone furoate nasal sprays
OCS oral corticosteroid
OF olfactory function
OT olfactory training
PCOD post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction
PICD post-infectious olfactory dysfunction
PVOD post-viral olfactory dysfunction
RCT randomized controlled trial
VAS visual analog scale
Drug information for intranasal corticosteroids
| Standard dosage | 2 sprays (100ug) of mometasone or fluticasone daily in each nostril for 3 weeks |
| Contraindications | Current or past tuberculosis, infections of any type (virus, bacteria, fungus, amoeba), glaucoma, cataracts, nasal ulcers |
| Main drug interactions | None |
| Main side effects | Nasal/throat irritation, dryness, epistaxis |
| Special points | Differences in the type, dosing, and duration of intranasal corticosteroid sprays vary among studies |
| Cost/cost-effectiveness | $30–$60 per month |
Studies comparing effectiveness of systemic corticosteroids
| Study/year | Level of evidence | Study design | Results | Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Le Bon et al. 2021 [ | 2b | - Non-randomized prospective controlled trial of 9 COVID-19 patients undergoing a 10-day course of OCS + OT, compared to 18 COVID-19 patients undergoing OT alone - Therapy was initiated 5 weeks after onset of olfactory dysfunction. Follow-up time was 10 weeks after treatment | - Greater improvement in TDI score among patients undergoing OCS + OT, compared to OT alone ( - The authors reported a low level of compliance for OT (< 50%) - 3 patients reported mild side effects to OCS including abdominal pain and insomnia | - This pilot study suggests a combination of OCS + OT is safe and beneficial for treatment of PCOD, compared to OT alone |
| Vaira et al. 2020 [ | 2B | - Non-randomized RCT with 18 patients with PCOD for more than 30 days - 9 patients treated with systemic prednisone and nasal irrigation with betamethasone for 15 days - 9 patients were otherwise untreated | - Patients showed no improvement at 20 days - Treatment group had greater improvement in olfactory scores at 40 day evaluations - Study limited by small sample size and unevenly distributed treatment groups | - Refractory anosmia may respond to combination of ICS and OCS - Treatment difference may manifest weeks after initial therapy |
| Huart et al. 2021 [ | 2A | - Delphi process performed on experts from the Clinical Olfaction Working Group | - General efficacy of OCS remains controversial; evidence to support OCS is level 4 - OCS may potentially inhibit neuronal regeneration of olfactory epithelium | - Selected patients may benefit from systemic corticosteroids given signs of nasal inflammation - There is a lack of evidence of clear benefit for patients taking OCS, and they should be used with caution according to patient circumstances |
| Hura et al. 2020 [ | 3a | - Systematic review of OCS in management of PVOD - 6 studies analyzed, including 1 prospective case–control study (level 3b) and 5 retrospective reviews (level 4) | - Short-term (~ 2 weeks with taper) OCS resulted in mildly improved olfactory scores across multiple psychophysical tests, at a cost of potential side effects related to OCS -Studies lacked control groups; therefore, it was difficult to determine whether recovery of olfaction was due to spontaneous recovery or the effect of treatment - A retrospective review by Kim et al. with 491 patients demonstrated that patients taking MFNS alone were less likely to recover olfactory function (28.2% recovery rate), compared to those taking oral prednisolone with MFNS (54.8% recovery rate) or those taking oral prednisolone alone (55.0% recovery rate) after 1-month follow-up ( - A retrospective review by Schriever et al. showed a significant increase in TDI score ( | - Short-term OCS (~ 2 weeks with taper) are an option in select patients with PVOD, after consideration of the potential risks of oral steroids in the setting of medical comorbidities |
| Addison et al. 2021 [ | 2A | - Meta-analysis of 40 studies, including 11 RCTs investigating PIOD | - Retrospective study showing improvement of OD with OCS and combination OCS with ICS, over ICS alone in general OD - RCT showing 40 mg prednisolone can lead to improve OF in PVOD - Oral methylprednisolone 40 mg showed improvement in general OD - Observational study showing no improvement in patients given oral prednisolone after failing ICS in general OD | - Oral corticosteroids may show some efficacy in PCOD patients as they have shown some success in improving anosmia in post-infectious OD - Patients who have failed ICS may not respond to OCS |
MFNS mometasone furoate nasal sprays
OCS oral corticosteroids
OD olfactory dysfunction
OT olfactory training
PCOD post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction
PIOD post-infectious olfactory dysfunction
PVOD post-viral olfactory dysfunction
TDI score threshold, discrimination, and identification score
Drug information for oral corticosteroids
| Standard dosage | Option 1) 30 mg/day × 3 days, followed by 20 mg/day × 4 days, followed by 10 mg/day × 7 days OR Option 2) 40 mg/day × 14 days, followed by a taper (daily reduction of 5 mg) |
| Contraindications | Diabetes, hypertension, kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, under- or over-active thyroid, neuropsychiatric disease, osteoporosis or any other bone disease, stomach or intestine problems, current or past tuberculosis, infections of any type (virus, bacteria, fungus, amoeba), myasthenia gravis, glaucoma, cataracts, mental disorders, pregnancy |
| Main drug interactions | Mifepristone, drugs that can cause bleeding/bruising (aspirin, coumadin), other systemic corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, immune modulators, certain antibiotics, antiseizure medications, anticholinesterase medications |
| Main side effects | Nausea/vomiting, heartburn, headache, dizziness, menstrual period changes, insomnia, fatigue, weight gain, fluid retention, hypertension, cataracts, glaucoma, easy bruising/bleeding, acne, reduced immune response and ability to fight infections, adrenal suppression, hyperglycemia, mental/mood changes, muscle weakness/pain, skin thinning, slow wound healing, bone pain or fractures, stomach/intestinal bleeding, trouble breathing, seizures |
| Special points | Differences in the type, dosing, and duration of oral corticosteroids vary among studies |
| Cost/cost-effectiveness | Inexpensive ($10–20 per course) |