Cargando…

Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19

BACKGROUND: Olfactory and taste disorders were reported in up to 30%–80% of COVID‐19 patients. The purpose of our study was to objectively assess smell impairment in COVID‐19 patients and to correlate olfactory function with viral recovery. METHODS: Between 15 and 30 April 2020, hospitalized patient...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mazzoli, Marco, Molinari, Maria Angela, Tondelli, Manuela, Giovannini, Giada, Ricceri, Riccardo, Ciolli, Ludovico, Picchetto, Livio, Meletti, Stefano
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7994699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33465295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2006
_version_ 1783669808594681856
author Mazzoli, Marco
Molinari, Maria Angela
Tondelli, Manuela
Giovannini, Giada
Ricceri, Riccardo
Ciolli, Ludovico
Picchetto, Livio
Meletti, Stefano
author_facet Mazzoli, Marco
Molinari, Maria Angela
Tondelli, Manuela
Giovannini, Giada
Ricceri, Riccardo
Ciolli, Ludovico
Picchetto, Livio
Meletti, Stefano
author_sort Mazzoli, Marco
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Olfactory and taste disorders were reported in up to 30%–80% of COVID‐19 patients. The purpose of our study was to objectively assess smell impairment in COVID‐19 patients and to correlate olfactory function with viral recovery. METHODS: Between 15 and 30 April 2020, hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection underwent an objective assessment of olfactory function with the Smell Identification subtest of the Sniffin’ Sticks Test (SI‐SST). Association between viral recovery and SI‐SST performance was evaluated. RESULTS: 51 patients were enrolled (49% males, mean age 66.2 ± 14.6 years). At the time of test administration, 45% were clinically recovered and 39% were virus‐free. Objective hyposmia/anosmia was found in 45% of the patients. Subjective olfactory disorders showed no association with the clinical or viral recovery status of the patients. On the contrary, none of the patients with anosmia and the 5% of hyposmic patients at test had viral recovery. The relative risk for hyposmic patients to be still positive at swab test was 10.323 (95% CI 1.483–71.869, p < .0001). Logistic regression analysis showed an independent and significant correlation between viral clearance and SI‐SST scores (OR = 2.242; 95% CI 1.322–3.802, p < .003). ROC curve analysis confirmed that a SI‐SST > 10.5 predicts viral clearance with 79% sensitivity and 87% specificity (AUC = 0.883). CONCLUSION: Hyposmia is part of COVID‐19 symptoms; however, only objectively assessed olfactory function is associated with viral recovery. SI‐SST is an easy and safe instrument, and further large multicentric studies should assess its value to predict infection and recovery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7994699
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79946992021-03-26 Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19 Mazzoli, Marco Molinari, Maria Angela Tondelli, Manuela Giovannini, Giada Ricceri, Riccardo Ciolli, Ludovico Picchetto, Livio Meletti, Stefano Brain Behav Original Research BACKGROUND: Olfactory and taste disorders were reported in up to 30%–80% of COVID‐19 patients. The purpose of our study was to objectively assess smell impairment in COVID‐19 patients and to correlate olfactory function with viral recovery. METHODS: Between 15 and 30 April 2020, hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection underwent an objective assessment of olfactory function with the Smell Identification subtest of the Sniffin’ Sticks Test (SI‐SST). Association between viral recovery and SI‐SST performance was evaluated. RESULTS: 51 patients were enrolled (49% males, mean age 66.2 ± 14.6 years). At the time of test administration, 45% were clinically recovered and 39% were virus‐free. Objective hyposmia/anosmia was found in 45% of the patients. Subjective olfactory disorders showed no association with the clinical or viral recovery status of the patients. On the contrary, none of the patients with anosmia and the 5% of hyposmic patients at test had viral recovery. The relative risk for hyposmic patients to be still positive at swab test was 10.323 (95% CI 1.483–71.869, p < .0001). Logistic regression analysis showed an independent and significant correlation between viral clearance and SI‐SST scores (OR = 2.242; 95% CI 1.322–3.802, p < .003). ROC curve analysis confirmed that a SI‐SST > 10.5 predicts viral clearance with 79% sensitivity and 87% specificity (AUC = 0.883). CONCLUSION: Hyposmia is part of COVID‐19 symptoms; however, only objectively assessed olfactory function is associated with viral recovery. SI‐SST is an easy and safe instrument, and further large multicentric studies should assess its value to predict infection and recovery. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7994699/ /pubmed/33465295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2006 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Mazzoli, Marco
Molinari, Maria Angela
Tondelli, Manuela
Giovannini, Giada
Ricceri, Riccardo
Ciolli, Ludovico
Picchetto, Livio
Meletti, Stefano
Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19
title Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19
title_full Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19
title_fullStr Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19
title_full_unstemmed Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19
title_short Olfactory function and viral recovery in COVID‐19
title_sort olfactory function and viral recovery in covid‐19
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7994699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33465295
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2006
work_keys_str_mv AT mazzolimarco olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19
AT molinarimariaangela olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19
AT tondellimanuela olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19
AT giovanninigiada olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19
AT ricceririccardo olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19
AT ciolliludovico olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19
AT picchettolivio olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19
AT melettistefano olfactoryfunctionandviralrecoveryincovid19