METHODS: A search of the literature published from 1 December 2019 to 30 April 2021 was conducted using four databases, based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The search was performed over one month (May 2021).
RESULTS: Only 9 articles were identified, with a total of 316 laboratory confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 positive children and adolescents, of whom 156 reported olfactory dysfunction. Four studies reported olfactory dysfunction based on subjective tests; four studies carried out objective assessment. Most studies reported on olfaction recovery.
CONCLUSION: The literature review revealed an olfactory dysfunction rate of 49 per cent amongst children and adolescents with coronavirus disease 2019. Persistence of olfactory dysfunction was reported in 7.1 per cent of the patients. Further studies involving objective measures need to be carried out in children and adolescents with coronavirus disease 2019.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted over a period of one month (April 2022).
RESULTS: 16 articles were selected based on our objective and selection criteria. A total of patients was included, with a median age of 10.9 years. 11 studies diagnosed VM based on diagnostic criteria. Caloric test and electro/videonystagmography are the most favoured investigation used (50%). Imaging was performed in 56.2% of included studies.
CONCLUSION: Deciphering the ideal diagnostic approach for VM is prudent to ensure children and adolescents suffering from VM are treated earlier. VM can be diagnosed using the established diagnostic criteria, which requires thorough and meticulous history taking. The available oto-neurological examination aims to exclude other disorders as its significance in diagnosing VM is still debatable.
METHODS: A comprehensive review of recent literature on non-acid reflux and airway reflux in children was conducted. Studies ranged from January 2010 till November 2021 were searched over a period of a month: December 2021.
RESULTS: A total of eleven studies were identified. All studies included in this review revealed a strong link between non-acid reflux and airway reflux in children. 6 of the included studies are prospective studies, 3 retrospective studies, 1 cross-section study, and type of study was not mentioned in 1 study. The most common reported respiratory manifestation of non-acid reflux in children was chronic cough (7 studies). Predominant non-acid reflux was noted in 4 studies. The total number of children in each study ranges from 21 to 150 patients. MII-pH study was carried out in all studies included as a diagnostic tool for reflux investigation.
CONCLUSION: Non-acid reflux is the culprit behind airway reflux as well as other myriads of extra-esophageal manifestations in children. Multicentre international studies with a standardized protocol could improve scientific knowledge in managing non-acid reflux in airway reflux amongst children.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted for the period from 1990 to 2020 by searching several databases over a 1-month period (January 2021) according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews for Interventions. Primary outcome was defined as the success of the intervention determined by the resolution of symptoms, and secondary outcome was determined by revisions surgery and presence of complications.
RESULTS: Only 7 articles were identified based on our objectives and selection criteria. All studies included are retrospective cohort case series (Level IV) and 1 cohort of matched controls (Level III). A total of 284 patients were included in this review, with a mean age of 7.8 years. A total of 463 balloon dilation were performed either bilaterally or unilaterally. The most common finding of ETD is middle ear effusion in 5 studies. Balloon dilation of eustachian tube was second-line treatment in 6 studies and first-line treatment in 1 study. Improvement of symptoms was identified in all studies through various assessments performed. Revision surgery was performed in 1 study with no major complications reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Balloon dilation of the eustachian tube may be considered as an alternative procedure following failed standard treatment in children. The quality of evidence is inadequate to recommend widespread use of the technique until a better-quality study has been completed. Future randomized controlled studies with a large sample size are warranted to determine the efficacy of this procedure amongst children.
OBJECTIVE: We reviewed the literature to determine the outcome of CRM in children and adolescents with BPPV.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted over one month (March 2022). The primary outcome was defined as the resolution of positional nystagmus and symptoms, and secondary outcomes were determined by the presence of recurrence and the number of attempts of CRM.
RESULTS: Ten articles were selected based on our objective and selection criteria. A total of 242 patients were included, with a mean of 10.9 years. BPPV was diagnosed based on history and positional nystagmus in all patients (100%). CRM was performed in 97.9% of patients, whereby 80.5% recovered following a single attempt of CRM. Recurrence of symptoms was identified in 10% of patients with no reported major complications.
CONCLUSION: CRM has demonstrated promising results in children and adolescents. The quality of evidence is limited until a better-quality study involving randomised controlled studies with a larger sample size is completed. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
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.
Please provide feedback to Administrator (email@example.com)