David Tianxiang Liu1, Gerold Besser1, Bertold Renner2, Stefan Seyferth3, Thomas Hummel4, Christian Albert Mueller1. 1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Institute of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. 3. Division of Pharmaceutics, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. 4. Smell and Taste Clinic, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The human sense of smell constitutes the main part of flavor perception. Typically, patients with loss of olfactory function complain of diminished perception during eating and drinking. However, some patients with smell loss still report normal enjoyment of foods. The aim of the present study was to compare orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function in patients with non-sinonasal smell loss and subjectively normal flavor perception. METHODS: Nineteen patients (mean age [range] 52.0 [8-83 years]) with self-reported olfactory impairment but subjective normal flavor perception were included. Olfactory performance was assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks (TDI) for orthonasal and the Candy Smell Test (CST) for retronasal function. Visual analogue scales were used for self-assessment of odor (SOP), taste (STP), and flavor perception (SFP), ranging from 0 (no perception) to 10 (excellent perception). RESULTS: Mean (SD) SFP was 8.0 (1.8). Mean (SD) orthonasal TDI-score of all patients was 14.4 (5.3, range 6-25.3) with 11 patients classified as anosmic and eight as hyposmic. Mean/SD retronasal CST-score was 8.8 (2.7, range 3-13) within the range of anosmia/hyposmia. No correlation was found between SFP and the CST (P = .62). CONCLUSION: The present results showed that despite claiming normal flavor perception, our patients were ortho- and retronasally dysosmic using standard tests for olfactory function. Although other explanations could be possible, we suggest that this subjective flavor perception might be due to unconscious memory recall from previously experienced cross-modal sensory interactions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 130:1629-1633, 2020.
OBJECTIVES: The human sense of smell constitutes the main part of flavor perception. Typically, patients with loss of olfactory function complain of diminished perception during eating and drinking. However, some patients with smell loss still report normal enjoyment of foods. The aim of the present study was to compare orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function in patients with non-sinonasal smell loss and subjectively normal flavor perception. METHODS: Nineteen patients (mean age [range] 52.0 [8-83 years]) with self-reported olfactory impairment but subjective normal flavor perception were included. Olfactory performance was assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks (TDI) for orthonasal and the Candy Smell Test (CST) for retronasal function. Visual analogue scales were used for self-assessment of odor (SOP), taste (STP), and flavor perception (SFP), ranging from 0 (no perception) to 10 (excellent perception). RESULTS: Mean (SD) SFP was 8.0 (1.8). Mean (SD) orthonasal TDI-score of all patients was 14.4 (5.3, range 6-25.3) with 11 patients classified as anosmic and eight as hyposmic. Mean/SD retronasal CST-score was 8.8 (2.7, range 3-13) within the range of anosmia/hyposmia. No correlation was found between SFP and the CST (P = .62). CONCLUSION: The present results showed that despite claiming normal flavor perception, our patients were ortho- and retronasally dysosmic using standard tests for olfactory function. Although other explanations could be possible, we suggest that this subjective flavor perception might be due to unconscious memory recall from previously experienced cross-modal sensory interactions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 130:1629-1633, 2020.
Authors: Susanne Rabady; Johann Altenberger; Markus Brose; Doris-Maria Denk-Linnert; Elisabeth Fertl; Florian Götzinger; Maria de la Cruz Gomez Pellin; Benedikt Hofbaur; Kathryn Hoffmann; Renate Hoffmann-Dorninger; Rembert Koczulla; Oliver Lammel; Bernd Lamprecht; Judith Löffler-Ragg; Christian A Müller; Stefanie Poggenburg; Hans Rittmannsberger; Paul Sator; Volker Strenger; Karin Vonbank; Johannes Wancata; Thomas Weber; Jörg Weber; Günter Weiss; Maria Wendler; Ralf-Harun Zwick Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Gerold Besser; Brigitte Erlacher; Kadriye Aydinkoc-Tuzcu; David T Liu; Eleonore Pablik; Verena Niebauer; Martin Koenighofer; Bertold Renner; Christian A Mueller Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: David T Liu; Gerold Besser; Bernhard Prem; Gunjan Sharma; Martin Koenighofer; Bertold Renner; Christian A Mueller Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2020-06-03 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Joel James; Ilan C Palte; Brandon J Vilarello; Lucas G Axiotakis; Patricia T Jacobson; David A Gudis; Jonathan B Overdevest Journal: Front Allergy Date: 2022-08-31
Authors: David T Liu; Katie M Phillips; Firas A Houssein; Marlene M Speth; Gerold Besser; Christian A Mueller; Ahmad R Sedaghat Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2022-03-30 Impact factor: 2.970
Authors: Gerold Besser; David T Liu; Bertold Renner; Thomas Hummel; Christian A Mueller Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Gerold Besser; Michaela M Oswald; David T Liu; Bertold Renner; Christian A Mueller Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2020-04-04 Impact factor: 2.503