Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36062970›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.

Lisa O'Byrne, Katie E Webster, Samuel MacKeith, Carl Philpott, Claire Hopkins, Martin J Burton

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Treatment of COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction with olfactory training, palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin, or combined therapy: a blinded controlled multicenter randomized trial.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. The long-term effect of COVID-19 infection on olfaction and taste; a prospective analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
    Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Neurologic and Neuromuscular Sequelae of COVID-19.Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America · 2023
    Review
  14. Comparison of prevalence and evolution of COVID-19 olfactory disorders in patients infected by D614 (wild) and B.1.1.7. Alpha variant: a brief report.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Post-COVID Symptoms in Occupational Cohorts: Effects on Health and Work Ability.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. [Interpretation of the 2021 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology expert consensus on the treatment of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2023
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Lisa O'ByrneDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Katie E WebsterCochrane ENT, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Samuel MacKeithOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Carl PhilpottDepartment of Medicine, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Claire HopkinsENT Department, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
Martin J BurtonCochrane UK, Oxford, UK.
Cochrane · GBGuy's Hospital · GBOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBSt. Vincent's University Hospital · IEUniversity of East Anglia · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlfactory 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. 

objectives1) 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

methodsThe 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. MAIN

resultsWe 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'

conclusionsThere 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.

Indexed as

COVID-19Adrenal Cortex HormonesAnosmiaExpectorantsHumansLuteolinNasal DecongestantsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSmellAdrenal Cortex HormonesExpectorantsLuteolinNasal Decongestants

Identifiers

PMID36062970
PMCPMC9443431
OpenAlexW4294667053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.