S Fonteyn1, C Huart2, N Deggouj2, S Collet3, P Eloy4, P Rombaux5. 1. Département d'oto-rhino-laryngologie, cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, avenue Hippocrate, 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. 2. Département d'oto-rhino-laryngologie, cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, avenue Hippocrate, 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; Institute of neuroscience, université catholique de Louvain, avenue Hippocrate, 54, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. 3. Département d'oto-rhino-laryngologie, CHU de Mont-Godinne, 1, rue Docteur Gaston Therasse, 5530 Yvoir, Belgium. 4. Département d'oto-rhino-laryngologie, cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, avenue Hippocrate, 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; Département d'oto-rhino-laryngologie, CHU de Mont-Godinne, 1, rue Docteur Gaston Therasse, 5530 Yvoir, Belgium. 5. Département d'oto-rhino-laryngologie, cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, avenue Hippocrate, 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; Institute of neuroscience, université catholique de Louvain, avenue Hippocrate, 54, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: philippe.rombaux@uclouvain.be.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIM: There is a high prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in the general population. Several causes of olfactory dysfunction have been reported and this disorder is classically divided into sinonasal and non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction. The aims of this study were firstly, to evaluate the frequency of the various aetiologies of olfactory dysfunction in a population of patients with non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction and secondly, to evaluate the degree of olfactory impairment associated with these various aetiologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a cohort of 496 patients with non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction. The aetiology of the olfactory dysfunction was recorded for each patient. The aetiology was determined by a complete clinical assessment, including medical history, complete otorhinolaryngological examination, psychophysical testing of olfactory function, recording of olfactory event-related potentials and brain magnetic resonance imaging. Six groups of patients were defined on the basis of the aetiology of the disease and orthonasal and retronasal psychophysical olfactory performances were evaluated in each group. RESULTS: Post-infectious and post-traumatic aetiologies were the most common causes, representing 37.9% and 33.1% of patients, respectively, followed by idiopathic (16.3%), congenital (5.9%), toxic (3.4%) and neurological (3.4%) olfactory dysfunction. Anosmia was significantly more frequent in congenital (93.1%) and post-traumatic (62.8%) olfactory dysfunction, whereas hyposmia was more frequent in the post-infectious group (59.6%). Orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function tests were significantly correlated in all groups except for the congenital group. CONCLUSIONS: The data of this study confirm that the most common causes of non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction are post-infectious and post-traumatic. Post-infectious olfactory dysfunction is mainly observed in middle-aged women and is mainly associated with hyposmia, whereas post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction is mainly observed in young men and is associated with a high rate of anosmia.
INTRODUCTION AND AIM: There is a high prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in the general population. Several causes of olfactory dysfunction have been reported and this disorder is classically divided into sinonasal and non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction. The aims of this study were firstly, to evaluate the frequency of the various aetiologies of olfactory dysfunction in a population of patients with non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction and secondly, to evaluate the degree of olfactory impairment associated with these various aetiologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a cohort of 496 patients with non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction. The aetiology of the olfactory dysfunction was recorded for each patient. The aetiology was determined by a complete clinical assessment, including medical history, complete otorhinolaryngological examination, psychophysical testing of olfactory function, recording of olfactory event-related potentials and brain magnetic resonance imaging. Six groups of patients were defined on the basis of the aetiology of the disease and orthonasal and retronasal psychophysical olfactory performances were evaluated in each group. RESULTS: Post-infectious and post-traumatic aetiologies were the most common causes, representing 37.9% and 33.1% of patients, respectively, followed by idiopathic (16.3%), congenital (5.9%), toxic (3.4%) and neurological (3.4%) olfactory dysfunction. Anosmia was significantly more frequent in congenital (93.1%) and post-traumatic (62.8%) olfactory dysfunction, whereas hyposmia was more frequent in the post-infectious group (59.6%). Orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function tests were significantly correlated in all groups except for the congenital group. CONCLUSIONS: The data of this study confirm that the most common causes of non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction are post-infectious and post-traumatic. Post-infectious olfactory dysfunction is mainly observed in middle-aged women and is mainly associated with hyposmia, whereas post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction is mainly observed in young men and is associated with a high rate of anosmia.
Authors: C Cingi; P Gevaert; R Mösges; C Rondon; V Hox; M Rudenko; N B Muluk; G Scadding; F Manole; C Hupin; W J Fokkens; C Akdis; C Bachert; P Demoly; J Mullol; A Muraro; N Papadopoulos; R Pawankar; P Rombaux; E Toskala; L Kalogjera; E Prokopakis; P W Hellings; J Bousquet Journal: Clin Transl Allergy Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 5.871
Authors: Axel Wolf; Laura Liesinger; Stefan Spoerk; Matthias Schittmayer; Doris Lang-Loidolt; Ruth Birner-Gruenberger; Peter V Tomazic Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-12-03 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: G Magliulo; M De Vincentiis; G Iannella; A Ciofalo; B Pasquariello; A Manno; D Angeletti; A Polimeni Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 2.124