4 research outputs found

    Xerostomia, gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions in patients with COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Background The novel Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) continues to have profound effect on global health. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence and characterize specific symptoms associated with COVID-19. Methods This retrospective study included 326 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection evaluated at the Emergency Department of the Umberto I Polyclinic Hospital, Rome, Italy between March 6th and April 30th, 2020. In order to assess xerostomia, olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions secondary to COVID-19, a telephone-based a modified survey obtained from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013–2014 for taste and smell disorders and the Fox Questionnaire for dry mouth were administered to 111 patients (34%) after discharge between June 4th and June 12th. Results Taste dysfunction was the most common reported symptom (59.5%; n = 66), followed by xerostomia (45.9%; n = 51) and olfactory dysfunctions (41.4%; n = 46). The most severe symptom was olfactory dysfunction with a median severity score of 8.5 (range: 5–10). Overall 74.5% (n = 38) of patients with xerostomia, 78.8% (n = 52) of patients with gustatory dysfunctions and 71.1% (n = 33) of patients with olfactory dysfunctions reported that all symptoms appeared before COVID-19 diagnosis. Overall, the majority of patients reported one symptom only (45.9%, n = 51), 37 (33.3%) reported the association of two symptoms, and 23 (20.7%) patients reported the association of three symptoms at the same time. Conclusion Xerostomia, gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions may present as a prodromal or as the sole manifestation of COVID-19. Awareness is fundamental to identify COVID-19 patients at an early stage of the disease and limit the spread of the virus

    Efficacy of antiseptic mouthrinses against SARS-CoV-2: A prospective randomized placebo-controlled pilot study

    Get PDF
    Coronavirus-disease-19 (COVID-19) continues to affect millions of individuals worldwide. Antiviral activity of mouthrinses remains an important research area as the oral cavity is a site of SARS-CoV-2 initial replication. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of three different mouthrinses in reducing the oral/oropharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral load.Objectives: Coronavirus-disease-19 (COVID-19) continues to affect millions of individuals worldwide. Antiviral activity of mouthrinses remains an important research area as the oral cavity is a site of SARS-CoV-2 initial replication. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of three different mouthrinses in reducing the oral/oropharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral load. Methods: Adult patients, hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 were recruited for the study. Oral/oropharyngeal baseline SARS-CoV-2 samples were collected and analyzed by Real-Time-PCR. Subsequently, patients were instructed to rinse with 1 % hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), 0.12 % chlorhexidine (CHX), 1 % povidone‑iodine (PVPI) or Sodium Chloride 0.9 % (placebo). Viral loads were measured right after (T1), and at 45 min (T2) from the rinse. Results: In the PVP-I 1 % group, 5/8 (62.5 %) patients at T1, and 3/8 (37.5 %) patients at T2, SARS-CoV-2 was not detectable in the swab specimens. In the H2O2 1 % group, 2/11 (18.2 %) patients at T1, and 2/11 (18.2 %) other patients at T2 showed no SARS-CoV-2 loads. One (12.5 %) patient in the CHX 0.12 % group showed SARS-CoV-2 negativity at T2. One (9.1 %) patient at T1, and another (9.1 %) patient at T2 showed no SARS-CoV-2 loads in the placebo group. Conclusions: Oral SARS-CoV-2 loads were reduced at T1 in the PVP-I 1 % and H2O2 1 % groups. Clinical relevance: PVP-I 1 % was the most effective rinse especially in patients with low viral copy numbers at baseline
    corecore