Anosmia and olfactory outcomes following paediatric traumatic brain injury

Bakker, Kathleen; Catroppa, Cathy; Anderson, Vicki

doi:10.3109/02699052.2015.1089597

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[5][6][7][8][9][10] Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is common in many disease states. These include sinonasal diseases, 9,10 post-infectious disorders, 11,12 traumatic brain injuries, 3,13,14 and neurodegenerative disorders. 6,[15][16][17][18] Methods for objectively measuring OD are an important component of disease detection as well as monitoring treatment success.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Affordable Rapid Olfaction Measurement Array: A Novel, Essential Oil-Based Test Strongly Correlated with UPSIT and Subjective Outcome Measures

Villwock

Moore

et al. 2019

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Olfactory dysfunction is an important facet of numerous disease states ranging from sinonasal disease to neurocognitive disorders. Due to expense and/or logistical barriers, objective olfactory testing is not common. We describe the creation of a novel, essential oil-based smell test, Affordable Rapid Olfaction Measurement Array (AROMA), composed at 14 scents at different concentrations and demonstrate correlation of AROMA with the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), patient age, Sinonasal Outcomes Test (SNOT-22), and perceived loss of smell. Methods: AROMA was developed for point-of-care olfactory testing and compared to the UPSIT, as well as subjective outcome measures as noted above. About 37 healthy controls were prospectively recruited to assess the reliability of AROMA using a test–retest protocol. An additional cohort of 38 participants with sinonasal disease were prospectively recruited to complete the AROMA and UPSIT, and were compared with a cohort of 30 healthy controls. Spearman correlation correlated AROMA and UPSIT results, patient age, SNOT-22, and perceived loss of smell. Results: AROMA demonstrated good test–retest reliability ( r = 0.85, P < .001). Spearman’s rho correlation of AROMA to UPSIT was statistically significant at ρ = 0.75 ( P < .001). SNOT-22, age, and perceived sense of smell were all significantly correlated with both AROMA (ρ = −0.548, −0.557, −0.642, respectively) and UPSIT (ρ = −0.367, −0.460, −0.552, respectively). Conclusion: AROMA has a strong correlation with UPSIT and may be more strongly correlated with sinonasal outcomes. Additionally, AROMA is reusable; level of odorant is not static; and AROMA can test both odor detection and identification. Level of evidence: 2b

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Affordable Rapid Olfaction Measurement Array: A Novel, Essential Oil-Based Test Strongly Correlated with UPSIT and Subjective Outcome Measures

Villwock

Moore

et al. 2019

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subjective examinations of olfaction remain the conventional tool in the investigation of olfactory deficit in routine neurological assessment. Objective examinations, which reveal OERPs arising from the anteriorcentral parts of the insula, the parainsular cortex, and the superior temporal sulcus, are not usually employed in routine clinical assessment of anosmia (16). Our findings indicate that without an objective assessment, the accuracy of a patient's olfaction cannot be definitively established in patients with posttraumatic anosmia.…”

Section: Olfactometric Profiles Of Tested Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Subjective and Objective Assessments of Post-traumatic Olfactory Dysfunction

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Traumatic brain injuries are the most common cause of olfactory dysfunction. Deficits in olfaction may be conductive or neurosensory in nature, with varying degrees of impairment resulting in a diminished quality of life and an increased risk for personal injury among patients. The aim of this research is to evaluate the results of the subjective and objective quantitative examinations of olfactory function in a group of patients with post-traumatic anosmia in order to predict its value in identifying olfactory deficits in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: The present study included 38 patients who reported anosmia or hyposmia caused by a traumatic head injury, and a group of 31 age- and sex-matched controls without olfactory dysfunction or prior history of head injury. The comparison of odor perception and identification of two oils (mint and anise) was assessed with the use of blast olfactometry with cortical olfactory event-related potentials. Results: Subjective olfactory tests revealed anosmia or hyposmia in 94% of patients with head injury-related olfactory dysfunction. Objective tests revealed olfactory event-related potentials from cranial nerve I produced by the stimulation with both mint and anise in 20 patients (52.6%). Olfactory event-related potentials from cranial nerve V produced by the stimulation with mint were registered in 26 patients (68.4%). The lack of any responses, from both cranial nerve I and V, was found in 12 patients (32% of cases). Conclusions: Findings from our study indicate the application of both subjective and objective examinations in the evaluation of patients with olfactory impairment. In the diagnosis of post-traumatic anosmia or hyposmia, objective examinations are particularly useful when the patients' level of cognition may be impaired or when subjects may be exaggerating their olfactory defects for a secondary gain. The diagnosis of damage to the olfactory system, specifically in the receptive part of the olfactory pathway, can be established in patients who showed reduced amplitudes or absent cortical responses in addition to absent odor identification and perception threshold in the subjective examination.

show abstract

“…15 There were 7 studies that described olfactory dysfunction from traumatic brain injury, accounting for 100 cases. [16][17][18][19][20][21][22] As well, 6 studies described olfactory loss associated with autism spectrum disorder, accounting for 126 cases. [23][24][25][26][27][28] The most common congenital etiology by number of cases was 22q11.2 deletion syndrome with 98 total cases reported from 3 studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The site and severity of impact in the injury was found to be a predictor of recovery, with occipital impacts correlating with reduced recovery. 17,18 Other mechanisms of injury included children who underwent a tracheotomy in early life, thereby depriving air flow through the nasal cavity for a period of time. 75,76 Obstructive causes of acquired olfactory dysfunction included adenotonsillar hypertrophy, [77][78][79] general nasal obstruction, 80 and juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma (JNA).…”

Section: Acquired Etiologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactory Dysfunction in Children: A Scoping Review

Payandeh

Motamed

Kirubalingam

et al. 2023

Otolaryngol.--head neck surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveOlfactory disorders are well‐studied in the adult population, however, there is a paucity of literature characterizing olfactory dysfunction in pediatric patients. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify known causes of olfactory loss in pediatric populations, clarify the extent of use and validity of smell tests, and summarize current therapies for olfactory loss.Data SourcesPubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Web of Science.Review MethodsDatabases were systematically searched in September 2020. Two independent reviewers conducted the title and abstract screen, followed by review of full‐texts for inclusion based on preset inclusion and exclusion criteria. Extracted data included study type, age/age‐range of participants, gender, radiological evidence of olfactory dysfunction, types and results of smell tests used, etiology of olfactory loss, and therapies employed for olfactory loss.ResultsA total of 103 articles (n = 1654) were eligible for final data extraction. The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test was used most frequently for smell testing (21% of studies). In total, 45 causes of olfactory dysfunction have been elucidated by this study: 22 congenital and 23 acquired. Few therapies were described, and all were specific to the etiology of olfactory loss.ConclusionOlfactory dysfunction has a wide range of etiologies in the pediatric population, and clinicians should have a diagnostic algorithm for how to identify a cause should they encounter it in practice. If no etiology can be identified, education around safety should be provided to both the patient and their caregivers.

show abstract

Anosmia and olfactory outcomes following paediatric traumatic brain injury

Cited by 11 publications

References 35 publications

Affordable Rapid Olfaction Measurement Array: A Novel, Essential Oil-Based Test Strongly Correlated with UPSIT and Subjective Outcome Measures

Affordable Rapid Olfaction Measurement Array: A Novel, Essential Oil-Based Test Strongly Correlated with UPSIT and Subjective Outcome Measures

Subjective and Objective Assessments of Post-traumatic Olfactory Dysfunction

Olfactory Dysfunction in Children: A Scoping Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About