METHOD: This interventional cohort pilot study on patients with Eustachian tube dysfunction compared those with nasopharyngeal carcinoma to patients without. Outcome assessment was based on tympanometry type and Eustachian Tube Dysfunction Questionnaire score.
RESULTS: A total of 14 ears (12 patients) were tested. Only 14 per cent of the nasopharyngeal carcinoma cohort showed improvement, while 71 per cent of the non-nasopharyngeal carcinoma group were successfully treated. No significant adverse effect was reported in any patient during this study.
CONCLUSION: Balloon Eustachian tube dilatation was not shown to be beneficial for post-radiotherapy Eustachian tube dysfunction in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients in the preliminary stages of this pilot study.
METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses ('PRISMA') checklist. The primary clinical characteristics of patients, and hazard ratios with 95 per cent confidence intervals of overall survival data, were tabulated from eligible studies. The relationship of cyclo-oxygenase-2 expression with survival outcome (expressed as hazard ratio) and treatment response (expressed as odds ratio) in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients was analysed, and explained with the aid of forest plot charts.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The pooled hazard ratio for overall survival was 2.02 (95 per cent confidence interval = 1.65-2.47). This indicates that the over-expression of cyclo-oxygenase-2 is significantly associated with the poor survival of nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. The pooled odds ratio of 0.98 (95 per cent confidence interval = 0.27-3.49) reveals that over-expression of cyclo-oxygenase-2 was not significantly related to the treatment outcome.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving patients with coronavirus disease 2019 self-perceived as asymptomatic was conducted. Assessments included the subjective Malaysian Smell and Taste Questionnaire and the culturally adapted Malaysian version of the objective Sniffin' Sticks Identification smell test.
RESULTS: In 81 participants (mean age of 31.59 ± 12.04 years), with mean time from diagnosis to smell test of 7.47 ± 3.79 days, subjective assessment showed that 80.2 per cent were asymptomatic (questionnaire score of 6) and 19 per cent had mild symptoms (questionnaire score of 7 and 8). The mean objective smell test score was 10.89 ± 2.11. The prevalence of olfactory impairment was 76.6 per cent among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 self-perceived as asymptomatic. There was no association between the questionnaire and the smell test scores (p = 0.25). There was a correlation between the smell test score and the duration from diagnosis to smell test (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: The objective assessment demonstrated that coronavirus disease 2019 patients who perceived themselves as asymptomatic showed olfactory impairment.
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: Sixty-one participants were recruited into a vapers group and a control group. The vapers group was instructed to smoke for 5 minutes, and their nasal resistance was measured pre-procedure and at 1 and 5 minutes post-procedure. The results were compared between both groups.
RESULTS: Repeated measures analysis of variance demonstrated that vaping has no statistically significant effect on total nasal airway resistance.
CONCLUSION: Although the differences between both groups were not statistically significant overall, the vapers group showed a reduction in nasal airway resistance in the short term.