Patients affected by COVID-19 present a series of different symptoms; despite some of these are common, other less likely appear. Auditory symptoms seem to be less frequent, maybe because rarer or, alternatively, because they are underestimated during the clinical investigation. The hearing impairment might be related to the central or peripheral involvement of the auditory pathways; in particular, the likelihood of thrombosis might be one of the causes. To date, the prevalence of auditory symptoms such as sudden or progressive sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus is unclear in COVID-19 patients. However, their presence might be an early sign of thrombosis or spread of the infection into the brain. In this systematic review of the literature we investigated the presence of auditory symptoms in COVID-19 patients and discussed their potential origin and causal relationship with SARS-CoV-2. Results showed that, despite rarely, auditory impairment can appear in patients with COVID-19 and should always be investigated for an early treatment and potential indicator of involvement of the central nervous system.

Background Since the spreading of SARS-CoV-2 from China, all deferrable medical activities have been suspended, to redirect resources for the management of COVID patients. The goal of this retrospective study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on head and neck cancers’ diagnosis in our Academic Hospital. Methods A retrospective analysis of patients treated for head and neck cancers between March 12 and November 1, 2020 was carried out, and we compared these data with the diagnoses of the same periods of the 5 previous years. Results 47 patients were included in this study. We observed a significative reduction in comparison with the same period of the previous 5 years. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a decrease in the number of new H&N cancers diagnoses, and a substantial diagnostic delay can be attributable to COVID-19 control measures.

Background: The diagnosis of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) involving the lateral semicircular canal (LSC) is traditionally entrusted to the supine head roll test, also known as supine head yaw test (SHYT), which usually allows identification of the pathologic side and BPPV form (geotropic vs. apogeotropic). Nevertheless, SHYT may not always allow easy detection of the affected canal, resulting in similar responses on both sides and intense autonomic symptoms in patients with recent onset of vertigo. The newly introduced upright head roll test (UHRT) represents a diagnostic maneuver for LSC-BPPV, supplementing the already-known head pitch test (HPT) in the sitting position. The combination of these two tests should enable clinicians to determine the precise location of debris within LSC, avoiding disturbing symptoms related to supine positionings. Therefore, we proposed the upright BPPV protocol (UBP), a test battery exclusively performed in the upright position, including the evaluation of pseudo-spontaneous nystagmus (PSN), HPT and UHRT. The purpose of this multicenter study is to determine the feasibility of UBP in the diagnosis of LSC-BPPV.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 134 consecutive patients diagnosed with LSC-BPPV. All of them received both UBP and the complete diagnostic protocol (CDP), including the evaluation of PSN and data resulting from HPT, UHRT, seated-supine positioning test (SSPT), and SHYT.Results: A correct diagnosis for LSC-BPPV was achieved in 95.5% of cases using exclusively the UBP, with a highly significant concordance with the CDP (p < 0.000, Cohen's kappa = 0.94), regardless of the time elapsed from symptom onset to diagnosis. The concordance between UBP and CDP was not impaired even when cases in which HPT and/or UHRT provided incomplete results were included (p < 0.000). Correct diagnosis using the supine diagnostic protocol (SDP, including SSPT + SHYT) or the sole SHYT was achieved in 85.1% of cases, with similar statistical concordance (p < 0.000) and weaker strength of relationship (Cohen's kappa = 0.80).Conclusion: UBP allows correct diagnosis in LSC-BPPV from the sitting position in most cases, sparing the patient supine positionings and related symptoms. UBP could also allow clinicians to proceed directly with repositioning maneuvers from the upright position.

Objective. The aim of this study was to provide an accurate picture of the changes which have occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the contributions given by Italian Otolaryngology Units. Methods. A 29-item questionnaire was completed and returned by 154 Otorhinolaryngology Units across Italy that investigated geographic distribution, the main changes which occurred in workload management and in clinical and surgical activities and screening procedures for COVID-19 in healthcare personnel and patients. Results. Nearly half of the Otolaryngology Units that responded to the questionnaire were merged with other units, while 22% were converted into COVID-19 units or temporarily closed. A reduction of 8.55% in the number of team members was reported, and about 50% of the units applied uniform work shifts for all staff. Elective activities were uniformly stopped or delayed, passing from 30,295 (pre-COVID data) to 5,684 (COVID data) weekly procedures, with a mean decrease of 81.24% (p < 0.001). Conclusions. Most of the elective otolaryngology activities were suspended during the pandemic; the only procedures were for oncology and emergency patients. Italian Otolaryngologists have demonstrated a high availability to collaborate with non-surgical colleagues.

Introduction: Current clinical evidences do not support any specific treatment against SARS-CoV-2. Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are typically used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and malaria; they have been considered for off-label and compassionate use in several countries against moderate to severe cases of COVID-19 and there's actually a massive demand of these two drugs. The aim of this paper is to briefly review the published literature, summarizing evidences about audiological implications after CQ and HCQ treatment. Methods: We conducted a review of the literature on Medline and Pubmed platforms from 27th May 2020 to 30 May 2020. We combined MeSH terms of "chloroquine", "hydroxychloroquine", "ototoxicity", "hearing loss", "tinnitus", "deafness" and "hearing". Publications with relevant data were included. Selected data (authors, country and year; sample size; study design; audiological side effects) were extracted and summarized in a table. Results: Of 45 initial studies, 14 met inclusion criteria. The authors found xix cases of HCQ ototoxicity; Tinnitus was reported in 2 cases, and it was found to be reversible or irreversible. Sensorineural hearing loss after HCQ use was reported in 7 patients; it was found to be irreversible or partially reversible after discontinuation of HCQ in 6 cases. Eight papers reporting CQ ototoxicity were; tinnitus was not reported by any authors. Sensorineural hearing loss after taking CQ was reported in 6 patients; it was found to be irreversible after discontinuation of CQ in 5 patients. One patient showed abnormal gait after a single intramuscular injection of CQ. Thirteen patients' Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) were found to be abnormal, but they resolved after CQ discontinuation. Conclusions: CQ and HCQ related ototoxicity is widely reported in the literature although the pathophysiological mechanism is not well known. Current data are not sufficient enough to support the use of CQ and HCQ as therapy for COVID-19, but considering the growing demand for these two drugs and the number of people around the world who have taken and will take CQ and HCQ, it must necessarily consider the clinical and social impact of long term audiological side effects.

The SARS-CoV-2 vaccination campaign is probably one of the most historic public hygiene measures in modern medicine. The drama of the pandemic has forced the scientific community to accelerate the development and commercialization of vaccines, thereby enhancing the phases of active surveillance. Among the adverse events following immunization (AEFI) reported, those of an audiovestibular interest, such as sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), tinnitus, dizziness, and vertigo, constitute a very small percentage. There are many plausible etiological hypotheses, and scientific research needs to pay more attention to the correct collection of data, which up until now have often been inadequate and fragmented, on which to base future studies. SSNHL, new onset tinnitus, vertigo, and dizziness require a prompt evaluation, while the proposed treatment is the same as it is for events unrelated to vaccination. These are uncommon adverse events, and the risk rates for these diseases have not increased in conjunction with the COVID-19 vaccinations, therefore there is no justification of any hesitation towards the vaccination campaign.

Few studies have investigated the neuropsychological profile of Hearing Loss (HL) subjects and the effects of hearing-aid on cognitive decline. We investigated the neuropsychological profile of HL patients at baseline and compared the neuropsychological profiles of patients with and without hearing-aid at 6 month. Fifty-six HL patients and 40 healthy subjects (HC) underwent neuropsychological and behavioral examination and were compared at baseline. Changes at follow-up were compared between HL patients with (N = 25) and without (N = 31) hearing-aids. At baseline, significant differences between HL and HC were found in MOCA test, Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices (CPM) and SF-36. Among mild-HL patients, patients with hearing-aid significantly improved on the Clock Drawing Test (CDT) as compared to patients without hearing-aid. Our findings indicate that hearing loss is associated with both a reduced efficiency of the global cognitive state and a worse quality of life as compared to HC, supporting the association between HL and cognitive impairment. Moreover, only patients with mild-HL shows some cognitive improvement after using hearing-aid, suggesting that rehabilitative strategies may be more effective to delay cognitive decline in such patients. However, we cannot exclude that hearing-aids may affect cognitive decline in more severe-HL, but a longer follow-up is needed.

No abstract