Olfactory Loss in Rhinosinusitis: Mechanisms of Loss and Recovery.

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a highly prevalent disease and up to 83% of CRS patients suffer from olfactory dysfunction (OD). Because OD is specifically seen in those CRS patients that present with a type 2 eosinophilic inflammation, it is believed that type 2 inflammatory mediators at the level of the olfactory epithelium are involved in the development of this olfactory loss. However, due to the difficulties in obtaining tissue from the olfactory epithelium, little is known about the true mechanisms of inflammatory OD. Thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic, interest in olfaction has been growing rapidly and several studies have been focusing on disease mechanisms of OD in inflammatory conditions. In this paper, we summarize the most recent data exploring the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying OD in CRS. We also review what is known about the potential capacity of olfactory recovery of the currently available treatments in those patients.

International clinical assessment of smell: An international, cross-sectional survey of current practice in the assessment of olfaction.

OBJECTIVES: Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is common and carries significant personal and societal burden. Accurate assessment is necessary for good clinical and research practice but is highly dependent on the assessment technique used. Current practice with regards to UK/international clinical assessment is unknown. We aimed to capture current clinical practice, with reference to contemporaneously available guidelines. We further aimed to compare UK to international practice. DESIGN: Anonymous online questionnaire with cross-sectional non-probability sampling. Subgroup analysis according to subspeciality training in rhinology ('rhinologists' and 'non-rhinologists') was performed, with geographical comparisons only made according to subgroup. PARTICIPANTS: ENT surgeons who assess olfaction. RESULTS: Responses were received from 465 clinicians (217 from UK and 17 countries total). Country-specific response rate varied, with the lowest rate being obtained from Japan (1.4%) and highest from Greece (72.5%). Most UK clinicians do not perform psychophysical smell testing during any of the presented clinical scenarios-though rhinologists did so more often than non-rhinologists. The most frequent barriers to testing related to service provision (e.g., time/funding limitations). Whilst there was variability in practice, in general, international respondents performed psychophysical testing more frequently than those from the UK. Approximately 3/4 of all respondents said they would like to receive training in psychophysical smell testing. Patient reported outcome measures were infrequently used in the UK/internationally. More UK respondents performed diagnostic MRI scanning than international respondents. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive UK-based, and only international survey of clinical practice in the assessment of OD. We present recommendations to improve practice, including increased education and funding for psychophysical smell testing. We hope this will promote accurate and reliable olfactory assessment, as is the accepted standard in other sensory systems.

Poor preoperative performance at Clock Drawing Test is associated with postoperative decline in olfaction in older patients: an observational pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Decline in olfaction may occur after general anesthesia, but the exact incidence and underlying physiopathology remain scarcely investigated. Olfactory dysfunction arises with aging and is known to be linked to cognitive impairment. In this pilot study, we evaluated the incidence of immediate postoperative decline in olfaction and its association with a preoperative cognitive test, performance at Clock Drawing Test (CDT), in a group of older patients. METHODS: This pilot study is a sub-analysis of a prospective observational study. Patients ≥ 65 years old and scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery under sevoflurane-based anesthesia were enrolled. CDT was part of the preoperative evaluation. We assessed olfaction on the day before and the day after surgery (between 16 and 26 h postoperatively) using the Sniffin' Sticks 12-item identification test, which consists of pen-like devices displaying 12 different odors. Postoperative decline in olfaction was defined as a decrease of at least 1 standard deviation in the olfactory score. RESULTS: We included a total of 93 patients, among whom 19 (20.4%) presented a postoperative decline in olfaction. The incidence of postoperative decline in olfaction was higher in the "CDT low-score" (score ≤ 5/8) group (11/34, 32.4%) than in the "CDT high-score" (score ≥ 6/8) group (8/58, 13.6%) (P = 0.030). Despite adjusting for confounding variables, CDT score remained independently associated with immediate postoperative decline in olfactory identification function (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.94, P = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative decline in olfaction occurred in 20.4% of older patients and was associated with poor preoperative performance at CDT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered on https://clinicaltrials.gov/ under the NCT04700891 number (principal investigator: Victoria Van Regemorter), in December 2020.

Olfactory Nomenclature: An Orchestrated Effort to Clarify Terms and Definitions of Dysosmia, Anosmia, Hyposmia, Normosmia, Hyperosmia, Olfactory Intolerance, Parosmia, and Phantosmia/Olfactory Hallucination.

BACKGROUND: Definitions are essential for effective communication and discourse, particularly in science. They allow the shared understanding of a thought or idea, generalization of knowledge, and comparison across scientific investigation. The current terms describing olfactory dysfunction are vague and overlapping. SUMMARY: As a group of clinical olfactory researchers, we propose the standardization of the terms "dysosmia," "anosmia," "hyposmia," "normosmia," "hyperosmia," "olfactory intolerance," "parosmia," and "phantosmia" (or "olfactory hallucination") in olfaction-related communication, with specific definitions in this text. KEY MESSAGES: The words included in this paper were determined as those which are most frequently used in the context of olfactory function and dysfunction, in both clinical and research settings. Despite widespread use in publications, however, there still exists some disagreement in the literature regarding the definitions of terms related to olfaction. Multiple overlapping and imprecise terms that are currently in use are confusing and hinder clarity and universal understanding of these concepts. There is a pressing need to have a unified agreement on the definitions of these olfactory terms by researchers working in the field of chemosensory sciences. With the increased interest in olfaction, precise use of these terms will improve the ability to integrate and advance knowledge in this field.

Chronic Rhinosinusitis Outcome Registry (CHRINOSOR): Establishment of an International Outcome Registry Driven by mHealth Technology.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence (RWE) is a valuable instrument to better understand the patient journey and effectiveness of therapies. RWE on the prevalence of uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and CRS natural course of disease across Europe is scarce. In addition, there is limited RWE that enables comparison of the effectiveness of marketed therapies including topical or systemic corticosteroids, sinus surgery, or biologics. OBJECTIVE: To establish an international CHRonic rhINOSinusitis Outcome Registry (CHRINOSOR) based on real-world data collection enabled by mobile health technology. METHODOLOGY: A digital platform, Galenus Health, supporting patients and physicians in the management of chronic respiratory diseases, is used to collect data on patient profile, disease history, patient outcomes, and a set of relevant clinical outcomes. Adult patients with a diagnosis of CRS are eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: A collaborative scientific network of 17 university ear-nose-throat (ENT) clinics from 10 European countries has been established with the aim to collect real-world data in a longitudinal and standardized manner. The Galenus Health digital platform is currently being implemented in these ENT clinics taking into account legal, privacy, and data security aspects. Up to 300 patients have already been included. CONCLUSIONS: CHRINOSOR is a collaborative effort that aims at improving our understanding of CRS, its comorbidities, and the effectiveness of its treatments. Ultimately, these insights will guide us as scientific community to develop future care pathways informed by RWE.

Sino-Orbital Aspergillosis in a Kidney Transplant Recipient.

Sino-orbital aspergillosis is a rare and severe infection mostly seen in immunocompromised individuals in which diagnosis may be challenging with potentially life-threatening consequences. Infection usually starts in the paranasal sinuses with secondary spreading to the adjacent orbits. Here, we report the case of a kidney transplant recipient who presented with proven invasive sino-orbital aspergillosis resulting in irreversible loss of vision despite surgical management and antifungal therapy. We review the literature with a focus on clinical presentation, diagnostic tools, and recommended treatment in the context of kidney transplantation.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Olfaction.

BACKGROUND: The literature regarding clinical olfaction, olfactory loss, and olfactory dysfunction has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, with an exponential rise in the past year. There is substantial variability in the quality of this literature and a need to consolidate and critically review the evidence. It is with that aim that we have gathered experts from around the world to produce this International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction (ICAR:O). METHODS: Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to olfaction. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review, or evidence-based review with recommendations format as dictated by available evidence and scope within the ICAR:O document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:O document was integrated and reviewed by all authors for final consensus. RESULTS: The ICAR:O document reviews nearly 100 separate topics within the realm of olfaction, including diagnosis, epidemiology, disease burden, diagnosis, testing, etiology, treatment, and associated pathologies. CONCLUSION: This critical review of the existing clinical olfaction literature provides much needed insight and clarity into the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with olfactory dysfunction, while also clearly delineating gaps in our knowledge and evidence base that we should investigate further.

Invasive Fungal Sinusitis with Ophthalmological Complications: Case Series and Review of the Literature.

Invasive fungal sinusitis can lead to dramatic complications in immunocompromised patients and requires prompt diagnosis. Here we report three cases with ophthalmological complications secondary to invasive fungal sinusitis in immunocompromised patients. From an ophthalmological point of view, these cases illustrate different clinical presentations, evolutions, complications, treatments, prognoses, and highlight different pathophysiological mechanisms. Diagnoses were delayed in all cases. In none of the cases did patients recover better vision than counting fingers at 24 months follow up, and two patients died. This case series highlights key points useful for quickly recognising this highly morbid infection in immunocompromised patients.

Systemic corticosteroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related smell dysfunction: an international view.

The frequent association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and olfactory dysfunction is creating an unprecedented demand for a treatment of the olfactory loss. Systemic corticosteroids have been considered as a therapeutic option. However, based on current literature, we call for caution using these treatments in early COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction because: (1) evidence supporting their usefulness is weak; (2) the rate of spontaneous recovery of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction is high; and (3) corticosteroids have well-known potential adverse effects. We encourage randomized placebo-controlled trials investigating the efficacy of systemic steroids in this indication and strongly emphasize to initially consider smell training, which is supported by a robust evidence base and has no known side effects.

Tackling nasal symptoms in athletes: Moving towards personalized medicine.

Adequate nasal breathing is indispensable for athletes, and nasal symptoms have been shown to interfere with their subjective feeling of comfortable breathing and quality of life. Nasal symptoms are caused by either structural abnormalities or mucosal pathology. Structural pathologies are managed differently from mucosal disease, and therefore, adequate diagnosis is of utmost importance in athletes in order to choose the correct treatment option for the individual. Literature suggests that nasal symptoms are more prevalent in athletes compared to the general population and certain sports environments might even trigger the development of symptoms. Given the high demands of respiratory function in athletes, insight into triggering factors is of high importance for disease prevention. Also, it has been suggested that athletes are more neglectful to their symptoms and hence remain undertreated, meaning that special attention should be paid to education of athletes and their caregivers. This review aims at giving an overview of nasal physiology in exercise as well as the possible types of nasal pathology. Additionally, diagnostic and treatment options are discussed and we focus on unmet needs for the management and prevention of these symptoms in athletes within the concept of precision medicine.

Clinical Olfactory Working Group consensus statement on the treatment of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract viruses are the second most common cause of olfactory dysfunction. As we learn more about the effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with the recognition that olfactory dysfunction is a key symptom of this disease process, there is a greater need than ever for evidence-based management of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to provide an evidence-based practical guide to the management of PIOD (including post-coronavirus 2019 cases) for both primary care practitioners and hospital specialists. METHODS: A systematic review of the treatment options available for the management of PIOD was performed. The written systematic review was then circulated among the members of the Clinical Olfactory Working Group for their perusal before roundtable expert discussion of the treatment options. The group also undertook a survey to determine their current clinical practice with regard to treatment of PIOD. RESULTS: The search resulted in 467 citations, of which 107 articles were fully reviewed and analyzed for eligibility; 40 citations fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 11 of which were randomized controlled trials. In total, 15 of the articles specifically looked at PIOD whereas the other 25 included other etiologies for olfactory dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: The Clinical Olfactory Working Group members made an overwhelming recommendation for olfactory training; none recommended monocycline antibiotics. The diagnostic role of oral steroids was discussed; some group members were in favor of vitamin A drops. Further research is needed to confirm the place of other therapeutic options.

COVID-19: Recovery from Chemosensory Dysfunction. A Multicentre study on Smell and Taste.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: With the COVID-19 pandemic, chemosensory dysfunction are among the most prevalent symptoms. Most reports are subjective evaluations, which have been suggested to be unreliable. The objective is to test chemosensory dysfunction and recovery based on extensive psychophysical tests in COVID-19 during the course of the disease. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: A total of 111 patients from four centers participated in the study. All tested positive for SARS-COV-2 with RT-PCR. They were tested within 3 days of diagnosis and 28 to 169 days after infection. Testing included extensive olfactory testing with the Sniffin' Sticks test for threshold, discrimination and identification abilities, and with the Taste Sprays and Taste Strips for gustatory function for quasi-threshold and taste identification abilities. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in olfactory function during and after infection. During infection 21% were anosmic, 49% hyposmic, and 30% normosmic. After infection only 1% were anosmic, 26% hyposmic, and 73% normosmic. For gustatory function, there was a difference for all taste qualities, but significantly in sour, bitter, and total score. Twenty-six percent had gustatory dysfunction during infection and 6.5% had gustatory dysfunction after infection. Combining all tests 22% had combined olfactory and gustatory dysfunction during infection. After infection no patients had combined dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Chemosensory dysfunction is very common in COVID-19, either as isolated smell or taste dysfunction or a combined dysfunction. Most people regain their chemosensory function within the first 28 days, but a quarter of the patients show persisting dysfunction, which should be referred to specialist smell and taste clinics for rehabilitation of chemosensory function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:1095-1100, 2021.

Recent Smell Loss Is the Best Predictor of COVID-19 Among Individuals With Recent Respiratory Symptoms.

In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n = 4148) or negative (C19-; n = 546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean ± SD, C19+: -82.5 ± 27.2 points; C19-: -59.8 ± 37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 < OR < 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.

The best COVID-19 predictor is recent smell loss: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19. METHODS: This preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. RESULTS: Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing no significant model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset. CONCLUSIONS: As smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (10

Mechanisms Linking Olfactory Impairment and Risk of Mortality.

Olfaction is a sense involved in a complex set of tasks, influencing eating behavior, increasing awareness of environmental hazards and affecting social communication. Surprisingly, smell disorders are very frequent, especially in the elderly population. Several recent studies conducted mostly in older subjects have demonstrated a strong association between olfactory impairment and overall mortality risk, with anosmia being even more predictive of 5 years mortality risk than cardiovascular disease. Presently, the underlying pathophysiology linking olfactory impairment to mortality remains unknown and only putative mechanisms are suggested. This review aims to examine the link between olfactory impairment and mortality and to discuss existing ideas on underlying existing mechanisms including, (1) the effect of olfactory loss on nutrition, life-threatening situations and social interactions, (2) associated neurodegenerative diseases, (3) accelerated brain aging, and (4) reflection of general health status being reflected in olfactory function.

Brain lesion-pattern analysis in patients with olfactory dysfunctions following head trauma.

The presence of cerebral lesions in patients with neurosensory alterations provides a unique window into brain function. Using a fuzzy logic based combination of morphological information about 27 olfactory-eloquent brain regions acquired with four different brain imaging techniques, patterns of brain damage were analyzed in 127 patients who displayed anosmia, i.e., complete loss of the sense of smell (n = 81), or other and mechanistically still incompletely understood olfactory dysfunctions including parosmia, i.e., distorted perceptions of olfactory stimuli (n = 50), or phantosmia, i.e., olfactory hallucinations (n = 22). A higher prevalence of parosmia, and as a tendency also phantosmia, was observed in subjects with medium overall brain damage. Further analysis showed a lower frequency of lesions in the right temporal lobe in patients with parosmia than in patients without parosmia. This negative direction of the differences was unique for parosmia. In anosmia, and also in phantosmia, lesions were more frequent in patients displaying the respective symptoms than in those without these dysfunctions. In anosmic patients, lesions in the right olfactory bulb region were much more frequent than in patients with preserved sense of smell, whereas a higher frequency of carriers of lesions in the left frontal lobe was observed for phantosmia. We conclude that anosmia, and phantosmia, are the result of lost function in relevant brain areas whereas parosmia is more complex, requiring damaged and intact brain regions at the same time.

Unirhinal Olfactory Testing for the Diagnostic Workup of Mild Cognitive Impairment.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction is associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), and already present at pre-dementia stage. OBJECTIVES: Based on the assumption that early neurodegeneration in AD is asymmetrical and that olfactory input is primarily processed in the ipsilateral hemisphere, we assessed whether unirhinal psychophysical and electrophysiological assessment of olfactory function can contribute to the diagnostic workup of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: Olfactory function of 13 MCI patients with positive amyloid PET, 13 aged-matched controls (AC) with negative amyloid PET and 13 patients with post-infectious olfactory loss (OD) was assessed unirhinally using (1) psychophysical testing of olfactory detection, discrimination and identification performance and (2) the recording of olfactory event-related brain potentials. Time-frequency analysis was used to enhance the signal-to-noise ratio of the electrophysiological responses. Psychophysical and electrophysiological assessment of auditory and trigeminal chemosensory function served as controls. RESULTS: As compared to AC and OD, MCI patients exhibited a significant asymmetry of olfactory performance. This asymmetry efficiently discriminated between MCI and AC (sensitivity: 85% , specificity: 77% ), as well as MCI and OD (sensitivity: 85% , specificity: 70% ). There was also an asymmetry of the electrophysiological responses, but not specific for MCI. In both MCI and OD, olfactory stimulation of the best nostril elicited significantly more activity than stimulation of the worse nostril, between 3-7.5 Hz and 1.2-2.0 s after stimulus onset. Trigeminal and auditory psychophysical testing did not show any difference between groups. CONCLUSION: MCI patients exhibit a marked asymmetry of behavioral olfactory function, which could be useful for the diagnostic workup of MCI.

Volume of olfactory bulb and depth of olfactory sulcus in 378 consecutive patients with olfactory loss.

The aim of this study was to investigate the olfactory bulb (OB) and sulcus (OS) in a large group of patients who have been well-characterized in terms of olfactory function, with a specific focus on the comparison between patients with olfactory loss due to chronic rhinosinusitis, head trauma, or acute infections. A retrospective study of 378 patients with olfactory loss was performed. Orthonasal olfactory function was assessed with the"Sniffin' Sticks" test kit, including tests for odor threshold, odor discrimination, and odor identification. Magnetic resonance imaging analyses were focused on OB volume and OS depth. Major results of the present study included the (1) demonstration of a correlation between olfactory function and OB volume across the various pathologies in a very large group of subjects; (2) the three functional tests exhibited a similar degree of correlation with OB volume. (3) The right, but not the left OS correlated with olfactory function; in addition, (4) OS was negatively correlated with age. In contrast to OS, (5) no side differences were found for the OB. Finally, (6) the three different causes of olfactory loss exhibited different patterns of results for the three olfactory tests. The present data suggest that the morphological assessment of the OB volume and OS depth produces useful clinical indicators of olfactory dysfunction.