Persistent COVID-19 parosmia and olfactory loss post olfactory training: randomized clinical trial comparing central and peripheral-acting therapeutics.

Department of Otolaryngology, Federico II University of Naples, Naples, Italy. Department of Otolaryngology, Ospedali Riuniti Marche Nord, Fano, Italy. Department of Otolaryngology, Fatebenefratelli Isola Tiberina-Gemelli Isola, Rome, Italy. Psychology Department, UTIU, Rome, Italy. GF Ingrassia Department, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. GF Ingrassia Department, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. ariannadistadio@hotmail.com. IRCCS Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy. ariannadistadio@hotmail.com.

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;(7):3671-3678

Abstract

PURPOSE Although COVID-19 anosmia is often transient, patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (pOD) can experience refractory parosmia and diminished smell. This study evaluated four putative therapies for parosmia in patients with chronic COVID-19 olfactory impairment. METHODS After screening nasal endoscopy, 85 patients (49 female, 58%) with pOD and treatment-refractory parosmia were randomized to: (1) ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin + olfactory training (OT) (umPEALUT group, n = 17), (2) alpha-lipoic acid + OT (ALA group, n = 21), (3) umPEALUT + ALA + OT (combination group, n = 28), or 4) olfactory training (OT) alone (control group, n = 23). Olfactory function was assessed at baseline (T0) and 6 months (T1) using a parosmia questionnaire and Sniffin' Sticks test of odor threshold, detection, and identification (TDI). Analyses included one-way ANOVA for numeric data and Chi-Square analyses for nominal data on parosmia. RESULTS The umPEALUT group had the largest improvement in TDI scores (21.8 ± 9.4 to 29.7 ± 7.5) followed by the combination group (19.6 ± 6.29 to 27.5 ± 2.7), both p < 0.01. The control and ALA groups had no significant change. Patients in the combination and umPEALUT groups had significantly improved TDI scores compared to ALA and control groups (p < 0.001). Rates of parosmia resolution after 6 months were reported at 96% for combination, 65% for control, 53% for umPEALUT and 29% for ALA (p < 0.001). All treatment regimens were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS umPEALUT and OT, with or without ALA, was associated with improvement in TDI scores and parosmia, whereas OT alone or OT with ALA were associated with little benefit.

Methodological quality

Metadata