4.5 Article

Anosmia is associated with lower in-hospital mortality in COVID-19

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2020.117163

关键词

COVID-19; Anosmia; Prognosis; Clinical presentation; Mortality

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Anosmia is common in Coronavirus disease 2019, but its impact on prognosis is unknown. We analysed whether anosmia predicts in-hospital mortality; and if patients with anosmia have a different clinical presentation, inflammatory response, or disease severity. Methods: Retrospective cohort study including all consecutive hospitalized patients with confirmed Covid-19 from March 8th to April 11th, 2020. We determined all-cause mortality and need of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We registered the first and worst laboratory parameters. Statistical analysis was done by multivariate logistic and linear regression. Results: We included 576 patients, 43.3% female, and aged 67.2 years in mean. Anosmia was present in 146 (25.3%) patients. Patients with anosmia were more frequently females, younger and less disabled and had less frequently hypertension, diabetes, smoking habit, cardiac and neurological comorbidities. Anosmia was independently associated with lower mortality (OR: 0.180, 95% CI: 0.069-0.472) and ICU admission (OR: 0.438, 95% CI: 0.229-0.838, p = 0.013). In the multivariate analysis, patients with anosmia had a higher frequency of cough (OR: 1.96, 95%CI: 1.18-3.28), headache (OR: 2.58, 95% CI: 1.66-4.03), and myalgia (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.12-2.71). They had higher adjusted values of hemoglobin (+0.87, 95% CI: 0.40-1.34), lymphocytes (+849.24, 95% CI: 157.45-1541.04), glomerular filtration rate (+6.42, 95% CI: 2.14-10.71), and lower D-dimer (-4886.52, 95% CI: -8655.29-(-1117.75)), and C-reactive protein (-24.92, 95% CI: -47.35-(-2.48)). Conclusions: Hospitalized Covid-19 patients with anosmia had a lower adjusted mortality rate and less severe course of the disease. This could be related to a distinct clinical presentation and a different inflammatory response.

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