Importance: Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms that persist or develop three months after the onset of COVID-19 pose a significant threat to the global healthcare system. These symptoms are yet to be synthesized and quantified via meta-analysis. Objective: To determine the prevalence of neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms reported 12 weeks (3 months) or more after acute COVID-19 onset in adults. Data sources: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus was conducted for studies published between January 1st, 2020 and August 1st, 2021. The systematic review was guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses. Study selection: Studies were included if the length of follow-up satisfied the National Institute for Healthcare Excellence (NICE) definition of post-COVID-19 syndrome (symptoms that develop or persist ≥3 months after the onset of COVID-19). Additional criteria included the reporting of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms in individuals with COVID-19. Data extraction and synthesis: Two authors independently extracted data on patient characteristics, hospital and/ or ICU admission, acute-phase COVID-19 symptoms, length of follow-up, and neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms. Main outcome(s) and measure(s):The primary outcome was the prevalence of neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms reported ≥3 months post onset of COVID-19. We also compared post-COVID-19 syndrome in hospitalised vs. non-hospitalised patients, with vs. without ICU admission during the acute phase of infection, and with mid-term (3 to 6 months) and long-term (>6 months) follow-up. Results: Of 1458 articles, 19 studies, encompassing a total of 11,324 patients, were analysed. Overall prevalence for neurological post-COVID-19 symptoms were: fatigue (37%, 95% CI: 24%-50%), brain fog (32%, 9%-55%), memory issues (27%, 18%-36%), attention disorder (22%, 10%-34%), myalgia (18%, 4%-32%), anosmia (12%, 7%-17%), dysgeusia (11%, 4%-17%) and headache (10%, 1%-21%). Neuropsychiatric conditions included sleep disturbances (31%, 18%-43%), anxiety (23%, 13%-33%) and depression (12%, 7%-21%). Neuropsychiatric symptoms substantially increased in prevalence between mid-and long-term follow-up. Compared to nonhospitalised patients, patients hospitalised for acute COVID-19 had reduced frequency of anosmia, anxiety,

Therapeutic, II.

Background Post‐viral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD) is one of the most common causes of olfactory loss. Despite its prevalence, optimal treatment strategies remain unclear. This article provides a comprehensive review of PVOD treatment options and provides evidence‐based recommendations for their use. Methods A systematic review of the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases was completed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies with defined olfactory outcomes of patients treated for PVOD following medical, surgical, acupuncture, or olfactory training interventions were included. The Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual and Conference on Guideline Standardization (COGS) instrument recommendations were followed in accordance with a previously described, rigorous, iterative process to create an evidence‐based review with recommendations. Results From 552 initial candidate articles, 36 studies with data for 2183 patients with PVOD were ultimately included. The most common method to assess olfactory outcomes was Sniffin’ Sticks. Broad treatment categories included: olfactory training, systemic steroids, topical therapies, a variety of heterogeneous non‐steroidal oral medications, and acupuncture. Conclusion Based on the available evidence, olfactory training is a recommendation for the treatment of PVOD. The use of short‐term systemic and/or topical steroids is an option in select patients after careful consideration of potential risks of oral steroids. Though some pharmacological investigations offer promising preliminary results for systemic and topical medications alike, a paucity of high‐quality studies limits the ability to make meaningful evidence‐based recommendations for the use of these therapies for the treatment of PVOD.

Studies show some return of breast sensation after breast reconstruction; however, recovery is variable and unpredictable. Efforts are being made to restore innervation by reattaching nerves (neurotization). We sought to systematically review the literature addressing breast sensation after reconstruction. The following databases were searched: EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed. Additionally, the PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY journal was hand searched from 1960 to 2009. Inclusion criteria included breast reconstruction for cancer, return of sensation with objective results, and patients aged 18 to 90 years. Studies with purely cosmetic procedures, case reports, studies with less than 10 patients, and studies involving male patients were excluded. The initial search yielded 109 studies, which was refined to 20 studies with a total pool of 638 patients. Innervated flaps have a greater magnitude of recovery, which occurs at an earlier stage compared with the noninnervated flaps. Overall, sensation to deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps may recover better sensation than transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flaps, followed by latissimus dorsi flaps, and finally implants. Women's needs and expectations for sensation have led plastic surgeons to investigate ways to facilitate its return. Studies, however, depict conflicting data. Larger series are needed to define the role of neurotization as a modality for improving sensory restoration.