OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical course and outcome of familial congenital laryngotracheal stenosis (FCLS).
METHODS: A literature search was conducted over a period of one month (September 2023) by searching several databases to identify studies published from inception to 31st August 2023.
RESULTS: Of 256 papers identified, five articles met the inclusion criteria. A total of 17 patients with slight female predominance (59 %) were identified. Familial congenital tracheal stenosis was reported in female twins (100 %). A variety of clinical presentations were listed. An endoscopic airway study was performed on all patients. 64.8 % of the included children were managed surgically. Genetic studies performed on 41 % of children could not locate genetic abnormalities.
CONCLUSION: Consanguinity, twin births, and female gender could be predisposing factors for FCLS, although the quality of evidence is low due to the rarity of the condition.
CASE PRESENTATION: Herein, we report on a middleaged male who presented with left-sided spontaneous epistaxis and aural fullness with no neck node which turned out to be basaloid cell carcinoma of nasopharynx.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: We highlight high clinical suspicion of rare variant of nasopharyngeal carcinoma although no palpable node was evident upon presentation.
OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy (EDCR) entails creating an opening from the lacrimal sac directly into the nasal cavity to counteract nasolacrimal duct obstruction. We reviewed the literature to determine the effectiveness and the safety of primary EDCR to treat pediatric nasolacrimal duct obstruction.
METHOD: A literature search was conducted by using a number of medical literature data bases for the period from 1995 to 2016. The following search words were used either individually or in combination: epiphora, nasolacrimal duct obstruction, endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy, powered endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy, laser-assisted endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy, children, congenital, acquired, presaccal obstruction, and postsaccal obstruction. In addition, a few articles were identified based on the experience and information provided by the senior authors (B.A., S.H., D.Y.W.). The search was conducted over a 1-month period (January 2017). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were followed when possible.
RESULTS: Only 10 original clinical research articles were selected based on our objectives and selection criteria. All the studies were at level of evidence III: nonrandomized and noncomparative prospective or retrospective case series. Altogether, 313 patients with ages that ranged from 4 months to 18 years were enrolled. A total of 352 EDCRs were performed that were either single sided (n = 313) or bilateral (n = 39). The most common causes of the obstruction were classified as congenital, followed by idiopathic, and then acquired. A meta-analysis was not performed because of the heterogeneity of the patient groups and variability of the methods used to measure outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Analysis of the results indicated that EDCR was an effective, safe therapeutic approach to treating nasolacrimal duct obstruction in pediatric patients. It should be considered as an alternative procedure to external dacryocystorhinostomy after a failed conservative treatment.
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analyses.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify studies published between 1 December 2019 and 23 July 2020. We used random-effects model to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic and Cochran's Q test. Robustness of the pooled estimates was checked by different subgroup and sensitivity analyses This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020183768).
RESULTS: We identified 1162 studies, of which 83 studies (n = 27492, 61.4% female) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the pooled prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients was 47.85% [95% CI: 41.20-54.50]. We observed olfactory dysfunction in 54.40% European, 51.11% North American, 31.39% Asian, and 10.71% Australian COVID-19 patients. Anosmia, hyposmia, and dysosmia were observed in 35.39%, 36.15%, and 2.53% of the patients, respectively. There were discrepancies in the results of studies with objective (higher prevalence) versus subjective (lower prevalence) evaluations. The discrepancy might be due to false-negative reporting observed in self-reported health measures.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients was found to be 47.85% based on high-quality evidence. Due to the subjective measures of most studies pooled in the analysis, further studies with objective measures are advocated to confirm the finding.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Laryngoscope, 131:865-878, 2021.
METHODS: Adult patients (≥18 years) tested positive for COVID-19 via reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and admitted in Hospital Tuanku Ja'afar Seremban, Malaysia, were recruited in this study. Patients completed a questionnaire via telephone interview comprising the following details: age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities, general and otorhinolaryngological symptoms, onset and duration of olfactory and gustatory dysfunction. Patients with persistent olfactory and gustatory dysfunction at the time of the initial interview were followed-up every 3 to 5 days till resolution.
RESULTS: A total of 145 patients were included in our study. The mean age of patients was 43.0 ± 17.7 (range: 18-86). Fever (44.1%) and cough (39.3%) were the most prevalent general symptoms. Thirty-one patients (21.4%) reported olfactory dysfunction and 34 (23.4%) reported dysgeusia. There was a significant association between both olfactory and gustatory dysfunction (P
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify studies published between December 1, 2019, and June 23, 2020, without language restrictions. There was no restriction on the study design; therefore, observational studies, clinical trials, and case series were included. In addition, preprints were considered if data of interest were reported.
REVIEW METHODS: Two authors independently screened articles for eligibility. A random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CIs. Quality assessment was done with critical appraisal tools of the Joanna Briggs Institute. The robustness of the pooled estimates was checked by subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine studies were included (N = 29,349 patients, 64.4% female). The pooled prevalence of taste disorders in patients with COVID-19 was 48.1% (95% CI, 41.3%-54.8%). The prevalence of taste disorders in studies with objective assessments was higher as compared with subjective assessments (59.2% vs 47.3%). The disorders were observed in 55.2% of European patients; 61.0%, North American; 27.1%, Asian; 29.5%, South American; and 25.0%, Australian. Ageusia, hypogeusia, and dysgeusia were detected in 28.0%, 33.5%, and 41.3% of patients with COVID-19. We identified 91.5% of the included studies as high quality.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of taste disorders in patients with COVID-19 was 48.1%. Objective assessments have higher prevalence than subjective assessments. Dysgeusia is the most common subtype, followed by ageusia and hypogeusia.
RELEVANCE: This paper reports two cases of congenital inferior turbinate hypertrophy in neonates that resulted in significant respiratory distress, feeding difficulties and sleep disturbance. Both patients were successfully treated surgically by endoscopic nasal dilatation and stenting. A literature search was performed to identify articles on congenital inferior turbinate hypertrophy in neonates and its management.
CONCLUSION: Albeit rare, congenital inferior turbinate hypertrophy should be considered a differential diagnosis in newborns presenting with respiratory distress at birth.
AIM: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses to estimate the overall pooled prevalence of vestibular dysfunction in children and adolescents.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify studies published until 29 April 2022. We used a random-effects model to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic and Cochran's Q test. The robustness of the pooled estimates was checked by different subgroups and sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: We identified 1811 studies, of which 39 studies (n = 323,663) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the pooled prevalence of children and adolescents with VD was 30.4% [95% CI 28.5-32.3%]. The age of the participants ranged from 1 to 19 years. Participants of the included 39 studies were from 15 countries. Among the studies, 34 were cross-sectional, and five were case-control designed. There were discrepancies found in the studies with objective (higher prevalence) versus subjective (lower prevalence) evaluations.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of VD among children and adolescents was found to be 30.4% based on high-quality evidence. Due to the subjective assessment of most studies pooled in the analysis, the results should be interpreted cautiously until future comparative studies with objective assessments are carried out.