Background and purpose: Specific respiratory tract infections, including COVID-19, may cause smell and/or taste disorders (STDs) with increased frequency. The aim was to determine whether new-onset STDs are more frequent amongst COVID-19 patients than influenza patients. Method: This was a case-control study including hospitalized patients of two tertiary care centres. Consecutive patients positive for COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (cases) and patients positive for influenza polymerase chain reaction (historical control sample) were assessed during specific periods, employing a self-reported STD questionnaire. Results: Seventy-nine cases and 40 controls were included. No significant differences were found in basal features between the two groups. New-onset STDs were significantly more frequent amongst cases (31, 39.2%) than in the control group (5, 12.5 %) [adjusted odds ratio 21.4 (2.77-165.4, P = 0.003)]. COVID-19 patients with new-onset STDs were significantly younger than COVID-19 patients without STDs (52.6 AE 17.2 vs. 67.4 AE 15.1, P < 0.001). Amongst COVID-19 patients who presented STDs, 22 (70.9%) recalled an acute onset and it was an initial manifestation in 11 (35.5%). Twenty-five (80.6%) presented smell disorders (mostly anosmia, 14, 45.2%) and 28 (90.3%) taste disorders (mostly ageusia, 14, 45.2%). Only four (12.9 %) reported concomitant nasal obstruction. The mean duration of STD was 7.5 AE 3.2 days and 12 patients (40%) manifested complete recovery after 7.4 AE 2.3 days of onset. Conclusion: New-onset STDs were significantly more frequent amongst COVID-19 patients than influenza patients; they usually had an acute onset and were commonly an initial manifestation. The use of STD assessment in anamnesis as a hint for COVID-19 and to support individuals' self-isolation in the current epidemic context is suggested.

Despite the increasing evidence of the benefit of corticosteroids for the treatment of moderate-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, no data are available about the potential role of high doses of steroids for these patients. We evaluated the mortality, the risk of need for mechanical ventilation (MV), or death and the risk of developing a severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) between high (HD) and standard doses (SD) among patients with a severe COVID-19. All consecutive confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to a single center were selected, including those treated with steroids and an ARDS. Patients were allocated to the HD (≥ 250 mg/day of methylprednisolone) of corticosteroids or the SD (≤ 1.5 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone) at discretion of treating physician. Five hundred seventy-three patients were included: 428 (74.7%) men, with a median (IQR) age of 64 (54-73) years. In the HD group, a worse baseline respiratory situation was observed and male gender, older age, and comorbidities were significantly more common. After adjusting by baseline characteristics, HDs were associated with a higher mortality than SD (adjusted OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.59-3.81, p < 0.001) and with an increased risk of needing MV or death (adjusted OR 2.35, p = 0.001). Conversely, the risk of developing a severe ARDS was similar between groups. Interaction analysis showed that HD increased mortality exclusively in elderly patients. Our real-world experience advises against exceeding 1-1.5 mg/kg/day of corticosteroids for severe COVID-19 with an ARDS, especially in older subjects. This reinforces the rationale of modulating rather than suppressing immune responses in these patients.

Botulinum toxin type A is one of the most useful treatments of sialorrhea in neurological disorders. Evidence for the use of incobotulinumtoxin A (inco-A) in the treatment of sialorrhea is limited. Thirty-six patients with sialorrhea were treated with infiltrations of inco-A into both parotid glands. The severity of sialorrhea was evaluated by the Drooling Severity Scale (DSS), and the Drooling Frequency Scale (DFS). Patients’ perceptions of clinical benefit were recorded via the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale. Following treatment, there was a significant difference in both the DFS and the DSS (p < 0.001). Clinical benefits on the basis of the PGI-I were present in up to 90% of patients.