Background: The ongoing outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents a major threat to human health, which impairs the functionality of several organs. One of the hardest challenges in the fight against COVID-19 is the development of wide-scale, effective, and rapid laboratory tests to control disease severity, progression, and possible sudden worsening. Monitoring patients in real-time is indeed highly demanded in this pandemic era when physicians need reliable and quantitative tools to prioritize patients’ access to intensive care departments. In this regard, salivary biomarkers are extremely promising, as they allow for a fast and non-invasive specimens’ collection, which can be repeated multiple times. Methods: We compare salivary levels of immunoglobulin A subclasses (IgA1 and IgA2) and free-light chains (FLC k and λ) in a cohort of 29 SARS-CoV-2 patients and 21 healthy subjects. Results: We found that each biomarkers differs significantly between the two groups, with p-values ranging from 10-8 to 10-4. The performance ranking of these markers, shows that λFLC level (p=1.4e-8) is the best-suited candidate to discriminate the two groups, with an accuracy of 0.94 (0.87-1.00 95% CI), a precision of 0.91 (0.81-1.00 95% CI), a sensitivity of 1.00 (0.96-1.00 95% CI) and a specificity of 0.86 (0.70-1.00 95% CI). Conclusion: These results suggest λFLC as an ideal indicator of patient conditions. This is more strengthened in consideration that λFLC half-life (approximately 6 hours) is significantly shorter than the IgA one (21 days): thus λFLC appears displaying the potential to effectively monitor patients fluctuation in real-time.

Epistaxis, particularly in Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT) patients, is a common otolaryngological emergency, often requiring complex management. A hierarchy of increasingly invasive interventions, from external compression of the nasal pyramid to nostril closure, is typically proposed and applied. We conducted a retrospective study on HHT patients to assess the effectiveness and longevity of invasive procedures postoperatively. Data were collected using the Epistaxis Severity Score (ESS) questionnaire. The primary focus was on changes in the frequency and intensity of epistaxis, while the secondary focus was on the overall quality of life. The study found that invasive procedures initially improved the frequency and intensity of epistaxis in HHT patients. However, within one to 9 months postoperatively, these benefits often diminished, with hemorrhagic symptoms recurring at similar or worsened levels. Facial trauma further negated the advantages of these procedures. The findings suggest a need for a gradual and increasingly invasive approach to managing epistaxis in HHT patients. Highly invasive procedures should be reserved for cases where less invasive methods fail, due to their limited temporal effectiveness and the risk of causing anatomical-functional changes in the rhino-sinus area, complicating future management of severe epistaxis.

Keywords: olfactory rehabilitation; chronic pain; fMRI;