Literature DB >> 23775878

The utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnostic evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss.

Peter K Hoekman1, Jeffrey J Houlton, Allen M Seiden.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To report the utilization and cost effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of patients with idiopathic olfactory loss. STUDY
DESIGN: Case series with chart review.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients presenting with olfactory disorders at a university-based taste and smell center from July 1998 through October 2011 was performed to determine the diagnostic utility of MRI in the evaluation of patients with idiopathic olfactory loss.
RESULTS: In a cohort of 839 patients with olfactory loss, idiopathic olfactory loss was most common, accounting for 247 patients-or 29% of this cohort. MRI was used in the evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss 54.9% of the time, and abnormalities were identified in 4.6% of these patients. However, only 0.8% of these patients had olfactory loss attributable to imaging abnormalities. Therefore, the estimated cost per attributable abnormal finding was $325,000, given an average hospital charge of $2,500 per MRI.
CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients with olfactory loss, the etiology most commonly remained idiopathic. Brain MRI, though frequently performed, demonstrated a very low diagnostic yield, with a rate of abnormal findings similar to that seen in the normal population. Based on these data, the routine use of MRI in patients presenting with isolated idiopathic olfactory loss may be unwarranted. Selection bias may contribute to the low yield of MRI among this cohort; further studies are needed to characterize those patients most likely to benefit from MRI evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
© 2013 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Olfaction; anosmia; cost effectiveness; magnetic resonance imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23775878     DOI: 10.1002/lary.24248

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  7 in total

1.  Diagnostic Accuracy of MRI-Based Morphometric Parameters for Detecting Olfactory Nerve Dysfunction.

Authors:  M K Lee; J H Lee; J H Kim; H Kim; L Joo; M Kim; S J Cho; C H Suh; S R Chung; Y J Choi; J H Baek
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Cerebral metabolic changes related to clinical parameters in idiopathic anosmic patients during olfactory stimulation: a pilot investigation.

Authors:  Alessandro Micarelli; Agostino Chiaravalloti; Roberta Danieli; Orazio Schillaci; Marco Alessandrini
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  MR Imaging-Based Evaluations of Olfactory Bulb Atrophy in Patients with Olfactory Dysfunction.

Authors:  M S Chung; W R Choi; H-Y Jeong; J H Lee; J H Kim
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Overview of Neurotrauma and Sensory Loss.

Authors:  Yusuf Mehkri; Chadwin Hanna; Sai Sriram; Ramya Reddy; Jairo Hernandez; Jeff A Valisno; Brandon Lucke-Wold
Journal:  J Neurol Res Rev Rep       Date:  2022-05-20

5.  Work-related olfactory disorder: a case series and review.

Authors:  Soon Woo Park; Young Joong Kang; Huisu Eom; Hyun-Jin Cho; Jungho Ahn; Sang-Gil Lee
Journal:  Ann Occup Environ Med       Date:  2018-03-12

6.  Case Report: COVID-19 Patient With Chief Complaint of Anosmia and Ageusia; a Unique Perspective on Atypical Symptomatology and Management in the Military.

Authors:  L T Alicia C Smith; C D R James Hodges; Molly Pratt; Ian M Porter
Journal:  Mil Med       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 1.437

Review 7.  Diagnosis of Anosmia and Hyposmia: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Abdul K Saltagi; Mohamad Z Saltagi; Amit K Nag; Arthur W Wu; Thomas S Higgins; Anna Knisely; Jonathan Y Ting; Elisa A Illing
Journal:  Allergy Rhinol (Providence)       Date:  2021-07-05
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.