Consequences of gaining olfactory function after lifelong anosmia

Neurocase ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Robert Pellegrino ◽  
Coralie Mignot ◽  
Charalampos Georgiopoulos ◽  
Antje Haehner ◽  
Thomas Hummel
Keyword(s):  
Olfactory Function

Olfactory Function in Head Trauma Patients a Link to Frontal Brain Damage?

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Schriever ◽  
T. Hummel ◽  
K. Grosser ◽  
M. Smitka
Keyword(s):  
Brain Damage ◽  
Head Trauma ◽  
Olfactory Function ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Frontal Brain

Intraoperative monitoring of olfactory function: a feasibility study

2020 ◽  
Vol 132 (5) ◽  
pp. 1659-1664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahan Momjian ◽  
Rémi Tyrand ◽  
Basile N. Landis ◽  
Colette Boëx
Keyword(s):  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Intraoperative Neuromonitoring ◽  
Olfactory Function ◽  
Chemical Senses ◽  
Cerebral Lesions ◽  
Artifact Rejection ◽  
Rejection Criterion ◽  
Olfactory Stimuli ◽  
Anterior Fossa

OBJECTIVEIntraoperative neuromonitoring of the chemical senses (smell and taste) has never been performed. The objective of this study was to determine if olfactory-evoked potentials could be obtained intraoperatively under general anesthesia.METHODSA standard olfactometer was used in the surgical theater with hydrogen sulfide (4 ppm, 200 msec). Olfactory-evoked potentials were recorded in 8 patients who underwent neurosurgery for resection of cerebral lesions. These patients underwent routine target-controlled propofol and sufentanil general anesthesia. Frontal, temporal, and parietal scalp subdermal electrodes were recorded ipsilaterally and contralaterally at the site of the surgery. Evoked potentials were computed if at least 70 epochs (0.5–100 Hz) satisfying the artifact rejection criterion (threshold 45 μV) could be extracted from signals of electrodes.RESULTSContributive recordings were obtained for 5 of 8 patients (3 patients had fewer than 70 epochs with an amplitude < 45 μV). Olfactory-evoked potentials showed N1 responses (mean 442.8 ± 40.0 msec), most readily observed in the patient who underwent midline anterior fossa neurosurgery. No component of later latencies could be recorded consistently.CONCLUSIONSThe study confirms that olfactory-evoked potentials can be measured in response to olfactory stimuli under general anesthesia. This demonstrates the feasibility of recording olfactory function intraoperatively and opens the potential for neuromonitoring of olfactory function during neurosurgery.

scholarly journals Postinfectious Olfactory Dysfunction: Oral Steroids and Olfactory Training versus Olfactory Training Alone: Is There any Benefit from Steroids?

ORL ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Sotiria Genetzaki ◽  
Evangelia Tsakiropoulou ◽  
Vasilios Nikolaidis ◽  
Konstantinos Markou ◽  
Iordanis Konstantinidis
Keyword(s):  
Olfactory Dysfunction ◽  
Olfactory Function ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Olfactory Testing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oral Steroids ◽  
Group A ◽  
Olfactory Training ◽  
First Line Treatment

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> There are limited treatment options for postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD). Olfactory training has recently been used in clinical practice, but no medical treatment is widely accepted. Although there is weak evidence for their value, some physicians use oral corticosteroids as first-line treatment. The aim of this study was to compare combined oral methylprednisolone and olfactory training with olfactory training alone in the management of PIOD. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This prospective cohort study included 131 patients with PIOD over a 2-year period before the COVID-19 pandemic. Seventy-eight patients who were treated with oral methylprednisolone and olfactory training (group A) were compared with 53 patients who were treated with olfactory training only (group B). Olfactory function was evaluated with “Sniffin’ Sticks” at baseline and 2, 8, and 16 weeks after initial assessment. Patients who improved after steroid treatment underwent magnetic resonance imaging of the paranasal sinuses, skin prick tests, lung spirometry, and sputum eosinophil assessment. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Oral steroids improved 19.23% of patients (<i>n</i> = 15) of group A. History, clinical evaluation, imaging, and laboratory tests identified an inflammatory background in half of them (<i>n</i> = 8). The remaining 7 had no findings of nasal inflammation, and all had a short history of olfactory dysfunction. Both groups significantly improved in olfactory testing results at the end of the olfactory training scheme without significant difference between them. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The percentage of improved patients after oral methylprednisolone was relatively low to suggest it as first-line treatment. Half of the improved patients had an underlying upper airway inflammatory condition not related to the infection that caused the acute loss of olfactory function.

scholarly journals Mucosal Eosinophilia and Neutrophilia Are Not Associated With QOL or Olfactory Function in Chronic Rhinosinusitis

2021 ◽  
pp. 194589242098743
Author(s):  
Nyssa F. Farrell ◽  
Jess C. Mace ◽  
David A. Sauer ◽  
Andrew J. Thomas ◽  
Mathew Geltzeiler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Chronic Rhinosinusitis ◽  
Nasal Polyposis ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Olfactory Function ◽  
Sinus Surgery ◽  
Small Subset ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Snot 22

Background Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is often differentiated by histopathologic phenotypes (eosinophilic versus neutrophilic), which may impact disease severity measures and outcomes. As such, it has been suggested that counts of cellular elements be included as part of a standard pathological report following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Objectives This cross-sectional study evaluated associations of mucosal eosinophilia and neutrophilia with measures of quality-of-life (QoL) and olfactory function. Methods Patients with medically refractory CRS completed the SNOT-22 survey and Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT) at enrollment. In addition, baseline Lund-Mackay computed tomography (CT) and Lund-Kennedy endoscopy scores were collected. Ethmoid mucosa was biopsied during ESS and reviewed using microscopy to quantify densest infiltrate of eosinophils or neutrophils per high-powered-field (HPF). Eosinophilic CRS (eCRS) and neutrophilic CRS (nCRS), both with and without nasal polyposis (NP), were compared across SNOT-22 and BSIT scores. Results 77/168 patients demonstrated mucosal eosinophilia (eCRS) while a total of 42/168 patients demonstrated mucosal neutrophilia (nCRS). After adjusting for polyp status, 35/168 had eCRSsNP, 42/168 eCRSwNP, 75/168 non-eCRSsNP, 16/168 non-eCRSwNP. Additionally, 22/161 were noted to have nCRSsNP, 20/161 nCRSwNP, 84/161 non-nCRSwNP, and 35/161 non-nCRSsNP. A small subset of patients demonstrated both eosinophilia and neutrophilia: 14 CRSwNP and 7 CRSsNP. When evaluating average Lund-Mackay Scores (LMS), significant differences existed between non-eCRSsNP and eCRSsNP (p = 0.006). However, after controlling for nasal polyps, eosinophilia did not significantly associate with differences in the Lund-Kennedy Score. Neutrophilia did not significantly associate with any changes in LMS or LKS after controlling for NP. Eosinophilic and neutrophilic histopathologic subtypes did not significantly associate with differences in baseline SNOT-22 or BSIT measures after controlling for NP. Conclusion Neither the presence of mucosal eosinophilia nor mucosal neutrophilia demonstrated significant associations with SNOT-22 quality-of-life or BSIT olfactory function scores when controlling for comorbid nasal polyposis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document