Psychophysical Olfactory Tests and Detection of COVID-19 in Patients With Sudden Onset Olfactory Dysfunction: A Prospective Study

Objective: To investigate the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) status of patients with initial sudden olfactory anosmia (ISOA) through nasopharyngeal swabs for reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) analysis and to explore their olfactory dysfunctions with psychophysical olfactory evaluation. Methods: A total of 78 ISOA patients were recruited from April 6, 2020, to April 10, 2020, through a public call of University of Mons (Mons, Belgium). Patients benefited from nasopharyngeal swabs and fulfilled the patient-reported outcome questionnaire. Among them, 46 patients performed psychophysical olfactory evaluation using olfactory identification testing. Based on the duration of the ISOA, 2 groups of patients were compared: patients with olfactory dysfunction duration ≤12 days (group 1) and those with duration >12 days (group 2). Results: In group 1, 42 patients (87.5%) had a positive viral load determined by RT-PCR and 6 patients (12.5%) were negative. In group 2, 7 patients (23%) had a positive viral load and 23 patients (77%) were negative. The psychophysical olfactory evaluation reported that anosmia and hyposmia occurred in 24 (52%) and 11 (24%) patients, respectively. Eleven patients were normosmic. The viral load was significantly higher in patients of group 1 compared with those of group 2. Conclusions: Coronavirus disease 2019 was detected in a high proportion of ISOA patients, especially over the first 12 days of olfactory dysfunction. Anosmia is an important symptom to consider in the detection of COVID-19 infection

Functional outcomes of supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma treated by transoral laser microsurgery compared with horizontal supraglottic laryngectomy in patients younger and older than 65 years

Il trattamento dei carcinomi sopraglottici rappresenta al momento una problematica controversa. Al momento sono disponibili 5 differenti opzioni di trattamento: la tradizionale laringectomia orizzontale sopraglottica (HSL), la laringectomia sopraglottica con laser CO2 (TLM), lapproccio mediante chirurgia robotica, la radioterapia e la radioterapia in combinazione con la radiochemioterapia. Alcuni studi hanno evidenziato come il rate di complicanze della chirurgia del distretto testa collo aumenti significativamente nei soggetti al di sopra dei 65 anni. Abbiamo pertanto voluto effettuare uno studio retrospettivo che confrontasse i risultati funzionali e il rate di complicanze nei pazienti al di sotto e al di sopra dei 65 anni, affetti da carcinomi squamocellulari sopraglottici T1-T3, sottoposti a laringectomia orizzontale sopraglottica tradizionale (HSL) o a TLM presso un Polo ospedaliero Universitario di terzo livello. Il gruppo di pazienti al di sopra dei 65 anni sottoposto a TLM ha mostrato differenze statisticamente significative per quanto riguarda il rate di polmonite ab ingestis (p = 0.026), tempo medio necessario al decannulamento (p = 0.001) e tempo medio di ricovero ospedaliero (p = 0.007) tutti risultati più lunghi rispetto a quelli osservati nei pazienti al di sotto dei 65 anni. Per quanto riguarda la chirurgia open, abbiamo rilevato una differenza statisticamente significativa solo per il tempo medio necessario per il decannulamento (p = 0.001) risultato essere più lungo nel gruppo di pazienti più giovani di 65 anni. In accordo coi nostri risultati sia la TLM che lapproccio open rappresentano opzioni sicure nei pazienti al di sopra dei 65 anni, ma in cosiderazione dellaumentato rischio di polmonite ab ingestis è mandatoria un adeguata valutazione della funzionalità polmonare preoperatoria, in particolare nei pazienti trattati con TLM. Nei pazienti al di sopra dei 65 anni inoltre la TLM rispetto allapproccio open riduce il rate di tracheostomie postoperatorie, il tempo medio necessario al decannulamento e il tempo medio di ricovero. Tuttavia non è stata rilevata alcuna differenza significativa in termini di rate di polmonite ab ingestis, disfagia o tempo medio di utilizzo del sondino naso gastrico

Clinical and Epidemiological Characteristics of 1,420 European Patients with mild-to-moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019

Background: The clinical presentation of European patients with mild-to-moderate Covid-19 infection is still unknown. Objective: To study the clinical presentation of Covid-19 in Europe. Methods: Patients with positive diagnosis of Covid-19 were recruited from 18 European hospitals. Epidemiological and clinical data were obtained through a standardized questionnaire. Bayesian analysis was used for analyzing the relationship between outcomes. Results: 1,420 patients completed the study (962 females, 30.7% of health care workers). The mean age of patients was 39.17\ub112.09 years. The most common symptoms were headache (70.3%), loss of smell (70.2%), nasal obstruction (67.8%), cough (63.2%), asthenia (63.3%), myalgia (62.5%), rhinorrhea (60.1%), gustatory dysfunction (54.2%) and sore throat (52.9%). Fever was reported by on 45.4%. The mean duration of Covid-19 symptoms of mild-to-moderate cured patients was 11.5\ub15.7 days. The prevalence of symptoms significantly varied according to age and sex. Young patients more frequently had ear, nose, and throat complaints, whereas elderly individuals often presented fever, fatigue and loss of appetite. Loss of smell, headache, nasal obstruction and fatigue were more prevalent in female patients. The loss of smell was a key symptom of mild-to-moderate Covid19 patients and was not associated with nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea. Loss of smell persisted at least 7 days after the disease in 37.5% of cured patients. Conclusion: The clinical presentation of mild-to-moderate Covid-19 substantially varies according to the age and the sex characteristics of patients. Olfactory dysfunction seems to be an important underestimated symptom of mild-to-moderate Covid-19 that needs to be recognized as such by the WHO

Accuracy of ChatGPT-Generated Information on Head and Neck and Oromaxillofacial Surgery: A Multicenter Collaborative Analysis

Objective: To investigate the accuracy of Chat-Based Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) in answering questions and solving clinical scenarios of head and neck surgery. Study Design: Observational and valuative study. Setting: Eighteen surgeons from 14 Italian head and neck surgery units. Methods: A total of 144 clinical questions encompassing different subspecialities of head and neck surgery and 15 comprehensive clinical scenarios were developed. Questions and scenarios were inputted into ChatGPT4, and the resulting answers were evaluated by the researchers using accuracy (range 1-6), completeness (range 1-3), and references' quality Likert scales. Results: The overall median score of open-ended questions was 6 (interquartile range[IQR]: 5-6) for accuracy and 3 (IQR: 2-3) for completeness. Overall, the reviewers rated the answer as entirely or nearly entirely correct in 87.2% of cases and as comprehensive and covering all aspects of the question in 73% of cases. The artificial intelligence (AI) model achieved a correct response in 84.7% of the closed-ended questions (11 wrong answers). As for the clinical scenarios, ChatGPT provided a fully or nearly fully correct diagnosis in 81.7% of cases. The proposed diagnostic or therapeutic procedure was judged to be complete in 56.7% of cases. The overall quality of the bibliographic references was poor, and sources were nonexistent in 46.4% of the cases. Conclusion: The results generally demonstrate a good level of accuracy in the AI's answers. The AI's ability to resolve complex clinical scenarios is promising, but it still falls short of being considered a reliable support for the decision-making process of specialists in head-neck surgery

Validation of the Quality Analysis of Medical Artificial Intelligence (QAMAI) tool: a new tool to assess the quality of health information provided by AI platforms

Background: The widespread diffusion of Artificial Intelligence (AI) platforms is revolutionizing how health-related information is disseminated, thereby highlighting the need for tools to evaluate the quality of such information. This study aimed to propose and validate the Quality Assessment of Medical Artificial Intelligence (QAMAI), a tool specifically designed to assess the quality of health information provided by AI platforms. Methods: The QAMAI tool has been developed by a panel of experts following guidelines for the development of new questionnaires. A total of 30 responses from ChatGPT4, addressing patient queries, theoretical questions, and clinical head and neck surgery scenarios were assessed by 27 reviewers from 25 academic centers worldwide. Construct validity, internal consistency, inter-rater and test–retest reliability were assessed to validate the tool. Results: The validation was conducted on the basis of 792 assessments for the 30 responses given by ChatGPT4. The results of the exploratory factor analysis revealed a unidimensional structure of the QAMAI with a single factor comprising all the items that explained 51.1% of the variance with factor loadings ranging from 0.449 to 0.856. Overall internal consistency was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.837). The Interclass Correlation Coefficient was 0.983 (95% CI 0.973–0.991; F (29,542) = 68.3; p < 0.001), indicating excellent reliability. Test–retest reliability analysis revealed a moderate-to-strong correlation with a Pearson’s coefficient of 0.876 (95% CI 0.859–0.891; p < 0.001). Conclusions: The QAMAI tool demonstrated significant reliability and validity in assessing the quality of health information provided by AI platforms. Such a tool might become particularly important/useful for physicians as patients increasingly seek medical information on AI platforms

Features of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 Patients with Dysphonia

Introduction To explore the prevalence of dysphonia in European patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and the clinical features of dysphonic patients. Methods The clinical and epidemiological data of 702 patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 were collected from 19 European Hospitals. The following data were extracted: age, sex, ethnicity, tobacco consumption, comorbidities, general and otolaryngological symptoms. Dysphonia and otolaryngological symptoms were self-assessed through a 4-point scale. The prevalence of dysphonia, as part of the COVID-19 symptoms, was assessed. The outcomes were compared between dysphonic and non-dysphonic patients. The association between dysphonia severity and outcomes was studied through Bayesian analysis. Results A total of 188 patients were dysphonic, accounting for 26.8% of cases. Females developed more frequently dysphonia than males (p=0.022). The proportion of smokers was significantly higher in the dysphonic group (p=0.042). The prevalence of the following symptoms was higher in dysphonic patients compared with non-dysphonic patients: cough, chest pain, sticky sputum, arthralgia, diarrhea, headache, fatigue, nausea and vomiting. The severity of dyspnea, dysphagia, ear pain, face pain, throat pain and nasal obstruction was higher in dysphonic group compared with non-dysphonic group. There were significant associations between the severity of dysphonia, dysphagia and cough. Conclusion Dysphonia may be encountered in a quarter of patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and should be considered as a symptom list of the infection. Dysphonic COVID-19 patients are more symptomatic than non-dysphonic individuals. Future studies are needed to investigate the relevance of dysphonia in the COVID-19 clinical presentation

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

International Consensus Statement on Rhinology and Allergy: Rhinosinusitis

Background: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR‐RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR‐RS‐2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence‐based findings of the document. Methods: ICAR‐RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence‐based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence‐based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary. Results: ICAR‐RS‐2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence‐based management algorithm is provided. Conclusion: This ICAR‐RS‐2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence‐based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS