2,588
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The outcome of fluticasone nasal spray on anosmia and triamcinolone oral paste in taste dysgeusia in COVID-19 patients

      letter

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We are extremely grateful to Jerome R. Lechien et al. for reviewing our article – “The outcome of fluticasone nasal spray on anosmia and triamcinolone oral paste in dysgeusia in COVID-19 patients”. In this study we have compared the gustatory and olfactory recovery time in patients receiving triamcinolone oral paste and fluticasone nasal spray versus those who did not receive any intervention for above symptoms [1]. We observed significant Improvement in smell and taste evaluation in triamcinolone and fluticasone group as compared to controls. In this regard reviewers have raised a few posers which we would like to address.Firstly, question was raises about reliability, sensitivity of the taste and odor tests used in our study stating that it is not quantifiable, standardised method. To improve the loss of smell associated with other respiratory viruses are nasal steroids, which the British Rhinological Society now recommends as first-line treatment for anosmia in patients with Covid-19 [2]. Steroids are potent anti-inflammatory drugs. When administered topically, as with a nasal spray, steroids act only at the site of application, and thus have very minimal side effects on the body as a whole. Consider topical corticosteroid drops (fluticasone nasule or betamethasone drops) in patients with loss of smell lasting longer than two weeks [3]. We acknowledge the reviewer for this observation, however it is important to note that to conduct this study in a rural hospital in central india, we used resources which are easily procured with easy application. Though many researchers have made use of olfactory testing devices, [4] standardised tests like the UPSIT are cost prohibitive and not available in this region. Secondly, it was pointed out that the smell and taste identification can be affected by various environmental and psychological factors, and that the use of a placebo spray could've eliminated any sort of evaluation bias [5]. Though this point is valid, we very humbly we like to argue that the subjects who were not provided the medication were unaware of the fact that there is a separate group of patients receiving an interventional drug for the treatment of these symptoms. To impart objectiveness to the response in a population which is intellectually not very competent and its rural background prompted us to evaluate them the way we have done. Hence we do not agree about the chances of bias creeping in the study. Thirdly, reviewer feels that olfactory cleft evaluation could have been rewarding and efficacious. According to flow chart to guide the process of initial assessment and management is reproduced from ENT UK in Fig. 1 . [2] Patients should be encouraged to continue first line measures such as topical corticosteroid sprays or olfactory training in our study. As MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) or DNE (diagnostic nasal endoscopy) was not done in our patients due to loss off smell associated with persistent gustatory dysfunction of less then 6 weeks duration also high infectivity rate with mild to moderate symptoms of patients on one hand and lack of funds on the other [6,7]. Fig. 1 Fig. 1 Lastly they have questioned the cost-effectiveness of the use of nasal spray where on the other hand there have been cases where the anosmia was treated within 2 weeks, without any intervention. Here we did like to refer to the fact that globally, in numerous systematic reviews and meta-analysis it has been demonstrated that anosmia and dysguesia persisted even after 2 negative covid swabs; i.e. even after 4–6 weeks of nasopharyngeal swab negativity [8,9]. In light of such an occurrence, it is necessary to treat these symptoms which might hamper the quality of life of the patient. We are extremely grateful to the editor and the reviewer for the constructive criticism and valuable advice. We are sure it will make us more wise and help improving the quality of our research. Thank you. Dr. Chandra Veer Singh.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Olfactory and Gustatory Outcomes in COVID-19: A Prospective Evaluation in Nonhospitalized Subjects

          Objective To prospectively assess the rate and timing of recovery of olfactory (OD) and gustatory (GD) dysfunction in patients affected by COVID-19. Study Design Cohort study. Setting Population-based evaluation in a COVID-19 high-prevalence region. Subjects and Methods We analyzed the clinical course of OD and GD in a cohort of home-quarantined SARS-CoV-2–positive patients from Northern Italy. Physicians administered a survey-based questionnaire at recruitment (T0). During follow-up, patients responded to online dedicated surveys modulated according to symptoms at T0. Results A total of 151 patients completed the follow-up survey. OD and/or GD were observed in 83% and 89% of subjects, respectively. Resolution rates of OD and GD at 30 days from onset were 87% and 82%, respectively. Risk factors for late resolution were grade of dysfunction at onset (total vs partial), gender, and presence of nasal congestion. Three (2%) patients previously reporting complete resolution of symptoms complained of subsequent recurrence of OD and/or GD after a mean of 19 days from resolution of the previous episode. Conclusion COVID-19–related OD and GD had high rate of resolution in the first month from onset of symptoms. However, in 10% to 15% of patients, these symptoms showed only partial improvement after this period.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The outcome of fluticasone nasal spray on anosmia and triamcinolone oral paste in dysgeusia in COVID-19 patients ☆

            Background To study the outcome of fluticasone nasal sprays in smell disorders and triamcinolone paste in taste dysfunction in a population of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients as the test group. The control group will not be given any intervention and only monitoring of these symptoms will be done to compare the recovery time. Methods This prospective interventional study was conducted from June to Nov 2020 at, Datta Meghe University during the COVID-19 outbreak. The 120 enrolled patients were tested at days 1 and 5 after proven infection by RT-PCR test. Result The mean age for all cases is 50.88 ± 15.93 years, whereas for the controls mean age is 51.2 ± 14.89. 2. Among cases 45 (75%) were males and 15 (25%) were females, among controls 43 (71.66%) were males and 17 (28.33%) were females. Among the case group, after the use of fluticasone spray in the nose and triamcinolone paste in the mouth there was a statistically significant improvement in recognizing all the odours and taste on day 5 compared to day 1. On comparing the smell and taste of cases and control group, either there is no improvement or worsening in smell or taste on day 5 in the control group. Conclusion The use of fluticasone nasal spray and triamcinolone paste had immensely influenced the basic senses such as smell and taste. Our study showed that olfactory and taste function significantly improved in patients with COVID-19. For all anosmia and dysgeusia cases who received fluticasone nasal spray and triamcinolone medications the recovery of smell senses and the taste was within a week.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Anosmia and loss of smell in the era of covid-19

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Am J Otolaryngol
                Am J Otolaryngol
                American Journal of Otolaryngology
                Elsevier Inc.
                0196-0709
                1532-818X
                5 April 2021
                5 April 2021
                : 103009
                Affiliations
                Department of Otorhinolaryngology, J.N. Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Science, Sawangi Meghe, Wardha 442004, India
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author.
                Article
                S0196-0709(21)00110-1 103009
                10.1016/j.amjoto.2021.103009
                8019654
                33846030
                45ffdfc1-b98b-4664-b073-f8d0363ad12e
                © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 6 March 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article