Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Cochrane ENT, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Sep 5;9(9):CD013876. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013876.pub3.
Olfactory dysfunction is a common consequence of COVID-19 infection and persistent symptoms can have a profound impact on quality of life. At present there is little guidance on how best to treat this condition. A variety of interventions have been suggested to promote recovery, including medication and olfactory training. However, it is uncertain whether any intervention is of benefit. This is an update of the 2021 review with one additional study added. OBJECTIVES: 1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. 2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance that had persisted for at least four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
We included two studies with 30 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant and palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin. Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 18 participants who had anosmia for at least 30 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 15-day course of oral corticosteroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 40 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. Palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 12 participants who had anosmia or hyposmia for at least 90 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 30-day course of palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 30 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.
嗅觉功能障碍是 COVID-19 感染的常见后果,持续存在的症状会对生活质量产生深远影响。目前,关于如何最好地治疗这种疾病的指导意见很少。已经提出了多种干预措施来促进康复,包括药物治疗和嗅觉训练。然而,尚不确定任何干预措施是否有益。这是对 2021 年审查的更新,增加了一项研究。
1)评估因 COVID-19 感染而持续存在嗅觉功能障碍的患者接受任何干预与不治疗相比的益处和危害。2)使用动态系统评价方法使证据保持最新。
Cochrane ENT 信息专家检索了 Cochrane ENT 登记册;中央对照试验注册库(CENTRAL);Ovid MEDLINE;Ovid Embase;Web of Science;ClinicalTrials.gov;ICTRP 和其他发表和未发表试验的来源。最新检索日期为 2021 年 10 月 20 日。
我们纳入了 COVID-19 相关嗅觉障碍持续至少四周的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们纳入了任何与不治疗或安慰剂相比的干预措施。
我们使用了标准的 Cochrane 方法。我们的主要结局是嗅觉恢复、疾病相关生活质量和严重不良事件。次要结局是嗅觉变化、一般生活质量、味觉障碍的发生率和其他不良事件(包括鼻出血/血性分泌物)。我们使用 GRADE 评估每个结局的证据确定性。
我们纳入了两项研究,共 30 名参与者。这些研究评估了以下干预措施:全身皮质类固醇加鼻内皮质类固醇/黏液溶解剂/减充血剂和棕榈酸乙醇酰胺加木樨草素。
全身皮质类固醇加鼻内皮质类固醇/黏液溶解剂/减充血剂与不干预相比我们纳入了一项纳入 18 名参与者的随机对照试验,这些参与者在 COVID-19 感染后至少 30 天出现嗅觉丧失。参与者接受了为期 15 天的口服皮质类固醇联合鼻腔冲洗(包括鼻内皮质类固醇/黏液溶解剂/减充血剂溶液)或不治疗。嗅觉测试在第 40 天进行。这是一项单一的小型研究,对于所有结局,证据的确定性均非常低。我们无法从数值结果中得出有意义的结论。
棕榈酸乙醇酰胺加木樨草素与不干预相比我们纳入了一项纳入 12 名参与者的随机对照试验,这些参与者在 COVID-19 感染后至少 90 天出现嗅觉丧失或嗅觉减退。参与者接受了为期 30 天的棕榈酸乙醇酰胺和木樨草素治疗或不治疗。嗅觉测试在第 30 天进行。这是一项单一的小型研究,对于所有结局,证据的确定性均非常低。我们无法从数值结果中得出有意义的结论。
关于 COVID-19 感染后持续嗅觉功能障碍的治疗效果和危害的证据非常有限。然而,我们已经确定了该领域的一些正在进行的试验。由于这是一项动态系统评价,我们将随着新结果的出现定期更新数据。