We analyzed data from two ongoing COVID-19 longitudinal serological surveys in Orange County, CA., between April 2020 and March 2021. A total of 8476 finger stick blood specimens were collected before and after a vaccination campaign. IgG levels were determined using a multiplex antigen microarray containing antigens from SARS-CoV-2, SARS, MERS, Common CoV, and Influenza. Twenty-six percent of specimens from unvaccinated Orange County residents in December 2020 were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive; out of 852 seropositive individuals 77 had symptoms and 9 sought medical care. The antibody response was predominantly against nucleocapsid (NP), full length, and S2 domain of spike. Anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) reactivity was low and not cross-reactive against SARS S1 or SARS RBD. A vaccination campaign at the University of California Irvine Medical Center (UCIMC) started on December, 2020 and 6724 healthcare workers were vaccinated within 3 weeks. Seroprevalence increased from 13% pre-vaccination to 79% post-vaccination in January, 93% in February, and 99% in March. mRNA vaccination induced higher antibody levels than natural exposure, especially against the RBD domain and cross-reactivity against SARS RBD and S1 was observed. Nucleocapsid protein antibodies can be used to distinguish vaccinees to classify pre-exposure to SARS-CoV-2 Previously infected individuals developed higher antibody titers to the vaccine than non pre-exposed individuals. Hospitalized patients in intensive care with severe disease reach significantly higher antibody levels than mild cases, but lower antibody levels compared to the vaccine. These results indicate that mRNA vaccination rapidly induces a much stronger and broader antibody response than SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BackgroundAcute invasive fungal sinusitis (AIFS) is an aggressive disease that requires prompt diagnosis and multidisciplinary treatment given its rapid progression. However, there is currently no consensus on diagnosis, prognosis, and management strategies for AIFS, with multiple modalities routinely employed. The purpose of this multi‐institutional and multidisciplinary evidence‐based review with recommendations (EBRR) is to thoroughly review the literature on AIFS, summarize the existing evidence, and provide recommendations on the management of AIFS.MethodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were systematically reviewed from inception through January 2022. Studies evaluating management for orbital, non‐sinonasal head and neck, and intracranial manifestations of AIFS were included. An iterative review process was utilized in accordance with EBRR guidelines. Levels of evidence and recommendations on management principles for AIFS were generated.ResultsA review and evaluation of published literature was performed on 12 topics surrounding AIFS (signs and symptoms, laboratory and microbiology diagnostics, endoscopy, imaging, pathology, surgery, medical therapy, management of extrasinus extension, reversing immunosuppression, and outcomes and survival). The aggregate quality of evidence was varied across reviewed domains.ConclusionBased on the currently available evidence, judicious utilization of a combination of history and physical examination, laboratory and histopathologic techniques, and endoscopy provide the cornerstone for accurate diagnosis of AIFS. In addition, AIFS is optimally managed by a multidisciplinary team via a combination of surgery (including resection whenever possible), antifungal therapy, and correcting sources of immunosuppression. Higher quality (i.e., prospective) studies are needed to better define the roles of each modality and determine diagnosis and treatment algorithms.

The emerging literature regarding the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suggests that patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD) have a milder disease course with improved clinical symptomatology and outcomes. This study utilized the National Library of Medicine’s PubMed/MEDLINE database to query for articles describing major outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with or without OD. Of the 1284 examined studies, 26 were included for a total of 11,408 patients (35.9% with OD). When compared with patients with OD, patients without OD were 5.3 times more likely to experience hospitalization (odds ratio, 5.28 [95% CI, 4.64-6.01]; P < .001), 7.0 times more likely to undergo intubation or ventilation (7.01 [5.52-8.90], P < .001), and 7.0 times more likely to die (6.97 [3.54-13.74], P < .001). This association between OD and COVID-19 outcomes may play an important role in patient risk stratification and counseling and early identification of potentially severe cases, and it may encourage future investigations regarding the infectivity and immune response to SARS-CoV-2. Level of evidence 4.

Recent studies provide conflicting evidence on the persistence of SARS-CoV-2 immunity induced by mRNA vaccines. Here, we aim to quantify the persistence of humoral immunity following vaccination using a coronavirus antigen microarray that includes 10 SARS-CoV-2 antigens. In a prospective longitudinal cohort of 240 healthcare workers, composite SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels did not wane significantly over a 6-month study period. In the subset of the study population previously exposed to SARS-CoV-2 based on seropositivity for nucleocapsid antibodies, higher composite anti-spike IgG levels were measured before the vaccine but no significant difference from unexposed individuals was observed at 6 months. Age, vaccine type, or worker role did not significantly impact composite IgG levels, although non-significant trends towards lower antibody levels in older participants and higher antibody levels with Moderna vaccine were observed at 6 months. A small subset of our cohort were classified as having waning antibody titers at 6 months, and these individuals were less likely to work in patient care roles and more likely to have prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2.

Objective Topical intranasal anticholinergics are commonly prescribed for the relief of chronic rhinitis and associated symptoms, warranting thorough assessment of the supporting evidence. The present study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anticholinergic nasal sprays in the management of allergic and non‐allergic rhinitis symptom severity and duration. Methods A search encompassing the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus databases was conducted. Primary studies describing rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and/or postnasal drip outcomes in rhinitis patients treated with an anticholinergic spray were included for review. Results The search yielded 1,029 unique abstracts, of which 12 studies (n = 2,024) met inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis and 9 (n = 1,920) for meta‐analysis. Median follow‐up was 4 weeks and ipratropium bromide was the most extensively trialed anticholinergic. Compared to placebo, anticholinergic treatment was demonstrated to significantly reduce rhinorrhea severity scores (standardized mean difference [95% CI] = −0.77 [−1.20, −0.35]; −0.43 [−0.72, −0.13]) and duration (−0.62 [−0.95, −0.30]; −0.29 [−0.47, −0.10]) in allergic and non‐allergic rhinitis patients respectively. Benefit was less consistent for nasal congestion, postnasal drip, and sneezing symptoms. Reported adverse effects included nasal mucosa dryness or irritation, epistaxis, headaches, and pharyngitis, though comparison to placebo found significantly greater risk for epistaxis only (risk ratio [95% CI] = 2.19 [1.22, 3.93]). Conclusion Albeit treating other symptoms with less benefit, anticholinergic nasal sprays appear to be safe and efficacious in reducing rhinorrhea severity and duration in both rhinitis etiologies. This evidence supports their continued use in the treatment of rhinitis‐associated rhinorrhea. Level of Evidence 1 Laryngoscope, 133:722–731, 2023

No abstract

BackgroundSinonasal neoplasms, whether benign and malignant, pose a significant challenge to clinicians and represents a model area for multidisciplinary collaboration in order to optimize patient care. The International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Sinonasal Tumors (ICSNT) aims to summarize the best available evidence and presents 48 thematic and histopathology‐based topics spanning the field.MethodsIn accordance with prior ICAR documents, ICSNT assigned each topic as an Evidence‐Based Review with Recommendations, Evidence‐Based Review, and Literature Review based on level of evidence. An international group of multidisciplinary author teams were assembled for the topic reviews using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses format, and completed sections underwent a thorough and iterative consensus‐building process. The final document underwent rigorous synthesis and review prior to publication.ResultsThe ICNST document consists of 4 major sections: general principles, benign neoplasms and lesions, malignant neoplasms, and quality of life and surveillance. It covers 48 conceptual and/or histopathology‐based topics relevant to sinonasal neoplasms and masses. Topics with a high level of evidence provided specific recommendations, while other areas summarized the current state of evidence. A final section highlights research opportunities and future directions, contributing to advancing knowledge and community intervention.ConclusionAs an embodiment of the multidisciplinary and collaborative model of care in sinonasal neoplasms and masses, ICSNT was designed as a comprehensive, international, and multidisciplinary collaborative endeavor. Its primary objective is to summarize the existing evidence in the field of sinonasal neoplasms and masses.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Objective To determine if antithrombotic therapy improves head and neck microvascular free flap survival following anastomotic revision. Study Design A retrospective review of all patients with microvascular free tissue transfer to the head and neck between August 2013 and July 2021. Setting Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Departments at University of Alabama at Birmingham, University of Colorado, and University of California Irvine. Methods Perioperative use of anticoagulation, antiplatelets, intraoperative heparin bolus, tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) and vasopressor use, and leech therapy were collected plus microvascular free flap outcomes. The primary endpoint was free flap failure. Analyses of free flaps that underwent anastomotic revision with or without thrombectomy were performed. Results A total of 843 microvascular free flaps were included. The overall rate of flap failure was 4.0% (n = 34). The overall rate of pedicle anastomosis revision (artery, vein, or both) was 5.0% (n = 42) with a failure rate of 47.6% (n = 20) after revision. Anastomotic revision significantly increased the risk of flap failure (odds ratio [OR] 52.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] [23.90, 121.1], p < .0001) especially when both the artery and vein were revised (OR 9.425, 95% CI [2.117, 52.33], p = .005). Free flap failure after the anastomotic revision was not affected by postoperative antiplatelet therapy, postoperative prophylactic anticoagulation, intraoperative heparin bolus, tPA, and therapeutic anticoagulation regardless of which vessels were revised and if a thrombus was identified. Conclusion In cases of microvascular free tissue transfer pedicle anastomotic revision, the use of antithrombotic therapy does not appear to significantly change free flap survival outcomes.