4.5 Review

Coronaviruses and the Chemical Senses: Past, Present, and Future

期刊

CHEMICAL SENSES
卷 45, 期 6, 页码 415-422

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/chemse/bjaa031

关键词

anosmia; chemesthesis; chemosensory; coronavirus; COVID-19; dysgeusia; gustatory; hypogeusia; hyposmia; infection; loss; MERS-CoV; olfaction; olfactory; pandemic; post-viral olfactory dysfunction; SARS-CoV; SARS-CoV-2; smell; taste

资金

  1. National Institute of Nursing Research [1ZIANR000035-01]
  2. Office of Workforce Diversity, National Institutes of Health
  3. Rockefeller University Heilbrunn Nurse Scholar Award
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH [ZIANR000035] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A wealth of rapidly evolving reports suggests that olfaction and taste disturbances may be manifestations of the novel COVID-19 pandemic. While otolaryngological societies worldwide have started to consider chemosensory evaluation as a screening tool for COVID-19 infection, the true nature of the relationship between the changes in chemosensory ability and COVID-19 is unclear. Our goal with this review is to provide a brief overview of published and archived literature, as well as the anecdotal reports and social trends related to this topic up to April 29, 2020. We also aim to draw parallels between the clinical/chemosensory symptomology reported in association to past coronavirus pandemics (such as SARS and MERS) and the novel COVID-19. This review also highlights current evidence on persistent chemosensory disturbances after the infection has resolved. Overall, our analysis pinpoints the need for further studies: (1) to better quantify olfaction and taste disturbances associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to those of other viral and respiratory infections, (2) to understand the relation between smell, taste, and chemesthesis disturbances in COVID-19, and (3) to understand how persistent are these disturbances after the infection has resolved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据