Olfactory Dysfunction: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Disorders of the sense of smell have received greater attention because of the frequency with which they occur as a symptom of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Olfactory dysfunction can lead to profound reduction in quality of life and may arise from many different causes. METHODS: A selective literature review was conducted with consideration of the current version of the guideline issued by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany. RESULTS: The cornerstones of diagnosis are the relevant medical history and psychophysical testing of olfactory function using standardized validated tests. Modern treatment strategies are oriented on the cause of the dysfunction. While treatment of the underlying inflammation takes precedence in patients with sinunasal dysosmia, olfactory training is the primary treatment option for other forms of the disorder. The prognosis is determined not only by the cause of the olfactory dysfunction and the patient's age, but also by the olfactory performance as measured at the time of diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Options for the treatment of olfactory dysfunction are available but limited, depending on the cause. It is therefore important to carry out a detailed diagnostic work-up and keep the patient informed of the expected course and prognosis.

Parosmia as a predictor of a better olfactory function in COVID-19: a multicentric longitudinal study for upper respiratory tract infections.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the course of olfactory dysfunction [OD] due to upper respiratory tract infections [URTI] especially for COVID-19 [C19] in a multicentric design and to investigate possible predictors for the outcome. METHODS: In a multicentric study, patients (n = 147, of which 96 were women) with OD due to URTI, including C19 and non-C19 were evaluated at two visits with a standardized medical history and "Sniffin' Sticks" extended psychophysical testing to examine the course and possible predictors for improvement of olfactory function. RESULTS: C19 patients showed better overall olfactory function (p < 0.001) compared to non-C19. Olfactory function (p < 0.001) improved over 3.5 ± 1.2 months in a comparable fashion for C19 and non-C19 comparable over time (p = 0.20) except for a more pronounced improvement of odour threshold (p = 0.03) in C19. C19 patients with parosmia exhibited a higher probability of clinically relevant improvement of odour threshold, a better threshold in the second visit, and tended to have a better TDI-score at the second visit. Further possible predictors for an improving olfactory function were younger age, female gender, and had lower scores in olfactory tests at the first visit. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with C19 and non-C19 URTI exhibit a similar improvement over 3-4 months except for the odour threshold, with a better TDI in both visits for C19. For C19 a better prognosis in terms of olfactory recovery was found for younger patients with parosmia and lower olfactory scores at the first visit. Still, for many patients with olfactory loss, an improvement that is experienced as complete may only occur over months and possibly years.

Psychophysical assessment of olfactory and gustatory function in post-mild COVID-19 patients: A matched case-control study with 2-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to psychophysically evaluate the prevalence of smell and taste dysfunction 2 years after mildly symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection compared to that observed at 1-year follow-up and while considering the background of chemosensory dysfunction in the no-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) population. METHOD: This is a prospective case-control study on 93 patients with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection and 93 matched controls. Self-reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunction was assessed by 22-item Sino-Nasal-Outcome Test (SNOT-22), item "Sense of smell or taste." Psychophysical orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function and gustatory performance were estimated using the extended Sniffin' Sticks test battery, 20 powdered tasteless aromas, and taste strips test, respectively. Nasal trigeminal sensitivity was assessed by sniffing a 70% solution of acetic acid. RESULTS: The two psychophysical assessments of chemosensory function took place after a median of 409 days (range, 366-461 days) and 765 days (range, 739-800 days) from the first SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, respectively. At 2-year follow-up, cases exhibited a decrease in the prevalence of olfactory (27.9% vs. 42.0%; absolute difference, -14.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -21.8% to -2.6%; p = 0.016) and gustatory dysfunction (14.0% vs. 25.8%; absolute difference, -11.8%; 95% CI, -24.2% to 0.6%; p = 0.098). Subjects with prior COVID-19 were more likely than controls to have an olfactory dysfunction (27.9% vs. 10.8 %; absolute difference, 17.2%; 95% CI, 5.2% to 28.8%) but not gustatory dysfunction (14.0% vs. 9.7%; absolute difference, 4.3%; 95% CI, -5.8% to 14.4% p = 0.496) still 2 years after the infection. Overall, 3.2% of cases were still anosmic 2 years after the infection. CONCLUSIONS: Although a proportion of subjects recovered from long-lasting smell/taste dysfunction more than 1 year after COVID-19, cases still exhibited a significant excess of olfactory dysfunction 2 years after SARS-CoV-2 infection when compared to matched controls.

Olfactory and gustatory disorders in COVID-19.

Loss of olfaction is one of the symptoms most commonly reported by patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although the spontaneous recovery rate is high, recent studies have shown that up to 7% of patients remain anosmic for more than 12 months after the onset of infection, leaving millions of people worldwide suffering from severe olfactory impairment. Olfactory training remains the first recommended treatment. With the continued lack of approved drug treatments, new therapeutic options are being explored. This article reviews the current state of science on COVID-19-related olfactory disorders, focusing on epidemiology, pathophysiology, cure rates, currently available treatment options, and research on new treatments.

Safety and immunogenicity of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases compared with healthy controls.

OBJECTIVES: A third COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for immunosuppressed patients. However, data on immunogenicity and safety of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are sparse and therefore addressed within this clinical trial. METHODS: 60 immunosuppressed patients and 48 healthy controls (HCs) received a third vaccination with an mRNA vaccine. The primary endpoint was defined as the presence of antibody levels against the receptor-binding domain (RBD)>1500 BAU/mL in patients with IMIDs versus HCs. Further endpoints included differences in neutralising antibodies and cellular immune responses after the third vaccination. Reactogenicity was recorded for 7 days, and safety was evaluated until week 4. RESULTS: Rate of individuals with anti-RBD antibodies>1500 BAU/mL was not significantly different after the third vaccination between patients with IMIDs and HCs (91% vs 100% p=0.101). Anti-RBD and neutralising antibody levels were significantly lower in patients with IMIDs after the third vaccination than in HCs (p=0.002 and p=0.016, respectively). In contrast, fold increase in antibody levels between week 0 and 4 was higher in patients with IMIDs. Treatment with biological (b) disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD) or combination of bDMARDs and conventional synthetic DMARDs was associated with reduced antibody levels. Enhanced cellular immune response to wild type and Omicron peptide stimulation was observed after the third vaccination. No serious adverse event was attributed to the third vaccination. CONCLUSION: Our clinical trial data support the immunogenicity and safety of a third COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IMIDs. However, effects of DMARD therapy on immunogenicity should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT No: 2021-002693-10.

Assessment of postviral qualitative olfactory dysfunction using the short SSParoT in patients with and without parosmia.

PURPOSE: To examine if the short formed Sniffin Sticks Parosmia Test (SSParoT), a test for parosmia can distinguish cases with parosmia from cases without parosmia. METHODS: In this study, 63 patients with postviral olfactory dysfunction were investigated including both COVID and non-COVID cases. The age, symptom duration, degree of parosmia/phantosmia was collected. For olfactory function, the Sniffin Sticks olfactory score was obtained including scores for odor threshold, discrimination and identification. For assessment of parosmic changes, the short SSParoT was adopted and both hedonic range (HedRang) and direction (HedDir) was calculated. RESULTS: The mean HedRang of patients with parosmia (2.35, standard deviation, SD = 1.40) and without parosmia (2.78, SD = 1.09) was smaller than that in controls (4.5, SD = 2.15). However, the mean HedDir of both parosmia (- 0.32, SD = 0.98) and non-parosmia patients (0.04, SD = 1.07) was similar to controls (- 0.1, SD = 1.55). When considering that the 10th percentile of the distribution of SSParoT score should distinguish between patients with and without parosmia, the sensitivity of the HedRang was 29% and specificity was 67%. For HedDir, the sensitivity was 6% and specificity was 100%. Only the odor identification score (r = 0.34, p = 0.01) discriminated parosmia and non-parosmia while other measures including HedRang and HedDir did not. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that the short SSParoT score could not distinguish patients with parosmia from patients without parosmia. Although the SSParoT represents an innovative approach to assess parosmia, and could be useful in the tracking of parosmic changes, the development of measures to diagnose parosmia in an objective way remains a challenge.

Impact of COVID-19-Mediated Olfactory Loss on Quality of Life.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 can be associated with a variety of longer-lasting impairments that can have a significant impact on patients' quality of life (QoL). While this is well described in the literature for limitations in lung capacity or permanent headaches, there is little research on the impact of olfactory dysfunction in the context of COVID-19 on patients' QoL. METHODS: In 65 patients with a history of COVID-19, the present olfactory ability was assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks test. In addition, olfactory QoL was assessed by the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders. Self-assessment was performed with visual analogue scales. The data were compared with the results obtained in healthy individuals and in patients with hyposmia due to other viral infections. RESULTS: The QoL of COVID-19 patients was significantly lower compared to the healthy control group. Even recovered subjects whose olfaction had already returned to the normal range still had a reduced QoL. The severity of the olfactory impairment correlated with the reduction in QoL. However, the olfactory QoL of COVID-19 patients was not worse than that of patients' olfactory loss due to other viral infections. Patients with parosmia had reduced QoL and rated their situation worse than patients without parosmia. CONCLUSION: QoL appears to be impaired in patients with long-lasting COVID-19 olfactory disorders several months after overcoming acute symptoms, even if olfaction has normalized. However, the impairment is not more pronounced than in patients with other postviral olfactory disorders of the same duration.

Scent of stem cells: How can neurogenesis make us smell better?

Throughout the animal kingdom, olfaction underlies the ability to perceive chemicals in the environment as a fundamental adaptation with a plethora of functions. Unique among senses, olfaction is characterized by the integration of adult born neurons at the level of both the peripheral and central nervous systems. In fact, over the course of life, Neural Stem Cells (NSCs) reside within the peripheral Olfactory Epithelium (OE) and the brain's subventricular zone that generate Olfactory Sensory Neurons (OSNs) and interneurons of the Olfactory Bulb (OB), respectively. Despite this unique hallmark, the role(s) of adult neurogenesis in olfactory function remains elusive. Notably, while the molecular signature and lineage of both peripheral and central NSC are being described with increasing detail and resolution, conflicting evidence about the role of adult born neurons in olfactory sensitivity, discrimination and memory remains. With a currently increasing prevalence in olfactory dysfunctions due to aging populations and infections such as COVID-19, these limited and partly controversial reports highlight the need of a better understanding and more systematic study of this fascinating sensory system. Specifically, here we will address three fundamental questions: What is the role of peripheral adult neurogenesis in sustaining olfactory sensitivity? How can newborn neurons in the brain promote olfactory discrimination and/or memory? And what can we learn from fundamental studies on the biology of olfaction that can be used in the clinical treatment of olfactory dysfunctions?

Störungen des Riech- und Schmeckvermögens bei COVID-19

Der Verlust des Riechvermögens ist eines der Symptome, die von Patienten mit COVID-19 mit am häufigsten angegeben werden. Obwohl die Spontanheilungsrate hoch ist, haben neuere Studien gezeigt, dass bis zu 7 % der Patienten mehr als zwölf Monate nach Beginn der Infektion anosmisch bleiben, sodass weltweit Millionen von Menschen unter schweren Riechstörungen leiden. Riechtraining ist nach wie vor die erste empfohlene Behandlungsform. Angesichts weiterhin fehlender zugelassener medikamentöser Behandlungsmöglichkeiten werden neue therapeutische Optionen erforscht. Dieser Artikel gibt einen Überblick über den aktuellen Stand der Wissenschaft zu COVID-19-bedingten Riechstörungen, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf der Epidemiologie, der Pathophysiologie, den Heilungsraten, den derzeit verfügbaren Behandlungsmöglichkeiten und der Forschung zu neuen Behandlungsmethoden liegt. Zitierweise: Klimek L, Hagemann J, Döge J, Freudelsperger L, Cuevas M, Klimek F, Hummel T. Olfactory and gustatory disorders in COVID-19. Allergo J Int 2022;31:243-50 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40629-022-00216-7

Topical Administration of Mometasone Is Not Helpful in Post-COVID-19 Olfactory Dysfunction.

Persistent olfactory dysfunction is a major concern post-COVID-19, affecting up to 5% of all patients. Different therapeutic options, including mometasone nasal spray, have been recommended, only some of which have been validated for post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction. In this study we psychophysically assessed the effect of intranasally applied mometasone furoate on the recovery of olfaction. The spray was applied with a long applicator so that the olfactory cleft could be reached effectively. After olfactory dysfunction had been confirmed psychophysically using Sniffin' Sticks, patients were randomly assigned to two different treatment arms: the study group (n = 40) underwent olfactory training and intranasal administration of mometasone furoate twice daily, whereas the control group (n = 46) performed olfactory training only. After a study duration of three months, psychophysical testing of olfaction was repeated using Sniffin' Sticks. We found no benefit of an additional topical administration of mometasone furoate compared to olfactory training alone. These results psychophysically confirm two previous studies which were based on patients' subjective self-ratings. Our findings are in contrast to current recommendations for the management of olfactory dysfunction post-COVID-19, which might have to be adapted accordingly.

Heterologous vector versus homologous mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccination in non-seroconverted immunosuppressed patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Impaired response to COVID-19 vaccination is of particular concern in immunosuppressed patients. To determine the best vaccination strategy for this vulnerable group we performed a single center, 1:1 randomized blinded clinical trial. Patients who failed to seroconvert upon two mRNA vaccinations (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) are randomized to receive either a third dose of the same mRNA or the vector vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Primary endpoint is the difference in SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody seroconversion rate between vector and mRNA vaccinated patients four weeks after the third dose. Secondary outcomes include cellular immune responses. Seroconversion rates at week four are significantly higher in the mRNA (homologous vaccination, 15/24, 63%) as compared to the vector vaccine group (heterologous vaccination, 4/22, 18%). SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses are reduced but could be increased after a third dose of either vector or mRNA vaccine. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, patient age and vaccine type are associated with seroconversion. No serious adverse event is attributed to COVID-19 booster vaccination. Efficacy and safety data underline the importance of a booster vaccination and support the use of a homologous mRNA booster vaccination in immunosuppressed patients.Trial registration: EudraCT No.: 2021-002693-10.

Immunogenicity and safety of a fourth COVID-19 vaccination in rituximab-treated patients: an open-label extension study.

OBJECTIVES: Patients under rituximab therapy are at high risk for a severe COVID-19 disease course. Humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are vastly diminished in B-cell-depleted patients, even after a third vaccine dose. However, it remains unclear whether these patients benefit from a fourth vaccination and whether continued rituximab therapy affects antibody development. METHODS: In this open-label extension trial, 37 rituximab-treated patients who received a third dose with either a vector or mRNA-based vaccine were vaccinated a fourth time with an mRNA-based vaccine (mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2). Key endpoints included the humoral and cellular immune response as well as safety after a fourth vaccination. RESULTS: The number of patients who seroconverted increased from 12/36 (33%) to 21/36 (58%) following the fourth COVID-19 vaccination. In patients with detectable antibodies to the spike protein's receptor-binding domain (median: 8.0 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (quartiles: 0.4; 13.8)), elevated levels were observed after the fourth vaccination (134.0 BAU/mL (quartiles: 25.5; 1026.0)). Seroconversion and antibody increase were strongly diminished in patients who received rituximab treatment between the third and the fourth vaccination. The cellular immune response declined 12 weeks after the third vaccination, but could only be slightly enhanced by a fourth vaccination. No unexpected safety signals were detected, one serious adverse event not related to vaccination occurred. CONCLUSIONS: A fourth vaccine dose is immunogenic in a fraction of rituximab-treated patients. Continuation of rituximab treatment reduced humoral immune response, suggesting that rituximab affects a second booster vaccination. It might therefore be considered to postpone rituximab treatment in clinically stable patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2021-002348-57.

Scent of stem cells: How can neurogenesis make us smell better?

Throughout the animal kingdom, olfaction underlies the ability to perceive chemicals in the environment as a fundamental adaptation with a plethora of functions. Unique among senses, olfaction is characterized by the integration of adult born neurons at the level of both the peripheral and central nervous systems. In fact, over the course of life, Neural Stem Cells (NSCs) reside within the peripheral Olfactory Epithelium (OE) and the brain’s subventricular zone that generate Olfactory Sensory Neurons (OSNs) and interneurons of the Olfactory Bulb (OB), respectively. Despite this unique hallmark, the role(s) of adult neurogenesis in olfactory function remains elusive. Notably, while the molecular signature and lineage of both peripheral and central NSC are being described with increasing detail and resolution, conflicting evidence about the role of adult born neurons in olfactory sensitivity, discrimination and memory remains. With a currently increasing prevalence in olfactory dysfunctions due to aging populations and infections such as COVID-19, these limited and partly controversial reports highlight the need of a better understanding and more systematic study of this fascinating sensory system. Specifically, here we will address three fundamental questions: What is the role of peripheral adult neurogenesis in sustaining olfactory sensitivity? How can newborn neurons in the brain promote olfactory discrimination and/or memory? And what can we learn from fundamental studies on the biology of olfaction that can be used in the clinical treatment of olfactory dysfunctions?

Olfactory dysfunction is more severe in wild-type SARS-CoV-2 infection than in the Delta variant (B.1.617.2).

Olfactory dysfunction is common in COVID-19, and sudden-onset dysosmia is an early marker for wild-type SARS-CoV-2 infection. Over 10 000 mutations of SARS-CoV-2 have been registered, with variants of concern (VOC) under particular scrutiny. We report a telemedicine-based, multicentre, prospective cohort study with quantitative olfaction testing comparing 79 patients with a confirmed VOC-Delta (n = 21) or wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 infection. Acute SARS-CoV-2 infection led to significant decrease of olfactory function in both cohorts. A majority of patients suffered from hyposmia or anosmia at inclusion with only 26 individuals performing normosmic. Sniffin'Sticks total scores were significantly higher for VOC-Delta patients at onset of illness, compared to WT patients (p < 0.001). At 4 weeks follow-up, olfaction scores recovered only partially for WT patients, thus odds of recovery were stronger in VOC-Delta patients. Also, subjective self-rating of chemosensory function was lower in WT, compared to VOC-Delta patients. The need for ongoing olfaction studies and their prognosis in SARS-CoV-2 background remains urgent, also in the light of increasing numbers of olfaction-related patient presentations.

[Recommendation for standardized medical care for children and adolescents with long COVID]. / Einheitliche Basisversorgung von Kindern und Jugendlichen mit Long COVID: Stellungnahme einer multidisziplinären Arbeitsgruppe der DGKJ-Konvent-Gesellschaften (Stand: Februar 2022).

This current consensus paper for long COVID complements the existing AWMF S1 guidelines for long COVID with a detailed overview on the various clinical aspects of long COVID in children and adolescents. Members of 19 different pediatric societies of the DGKJ convent and collaborating societies together provide expert-based recommendations for the clinical management of long COVID based on the currently available but limited academic evidence for long COVID in children and adolescents. It contains screening questions for long COVID and suggestions for a structured, standardized pediatric medical history and diagnostic evaluation for patients with suspected long COVID. A time and resource-saving questionnaire, which takes the clinical complexity of long COVID into account, is offered via the DGKJ and DGPI websites as well as additional questionnaires suggested for an advanced screening of specific neurocognitive and/or psychiatric symptoms including post-exertional malaise (PEM) and myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). According to the individual medical history as well as clinical signs and symptoms a step by step diagnostic procedure and a multidisciplinary therapeutic approach are recommended.

Olfactory and gustatory disorders in COVID-19

Loss of olfaction is one of the symptoms most commonly reported by patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although the spontaneous recovery rate is high, recent studies have shown that up to 7% of patients remain anosmic for more than 12 months after the onset of infection, leaving millions of people worldwide suffering from severe olfactory impairment. Olfactory training remains the first recommended treatment. With the continued lack of approved drug treatments, new therapeutic options are being explored. This article reviews the current state of science on COVID-19-related olfactory disorders, focusing on epidemiology, pathophysiology, cure rates, currently available treatment options, and research on new treatments.

Results from psychophysical tests of smell and taste during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a review Risultati dei test psicofisici olfattivi e gustativi durante l’infezione COVID-19: revisione della letteratura

SUMMARY Only a few studies have assessed smell and taste in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with psychophysical tests, while the majority performed self-rating evaluations. Given the heterogeneity of the published literature, the aim of this review was to systematically analyse the articles on this topic with a focus on psychophysical testing. A search on PubMed and Web of Science from December 2019, to November 2021, with cross-references, was executed. The main eligibility criteria were English-language articles, investigating the clinical features of olfaction and gustation in COVID-19 patients using self-rating assessment, psychophysical testing and imaging techniques. A total of 638 articles were identified and 66 were included. Self-rating assessment was performed in 31 studies, while psychophysical testing in 30 and imaging techniques in 5. The prevalence of chemosensory dysfunction was the most investigated topic, followed by the recovery time. About the psychophysical assessment, the extended version of the Sniffin’ Sticks was used in 11 articles and the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center test in another 11. The olfactory threshold performance was the most impacted compared to the discrimination and identification capacities in accordance with the hypothesis of a tropism of SARS-CoV-2 for the olfactory mucosa. The timing significantly influenced the results of the psychophysical testing with 20% of patients presenting olfactory dysfunction at one month after infection.

Einheitliche Basisversorgung von Kindern und Jugendlichen mit Long COVID : Stellungnahme einer multidisziplinären Arbeitsgruppe der DGKJ-Konvent-Gesellschaften (Stand: Februar 2022) Recommendation for standardized medical care for children and adolescents with long COVIDStatement of a multidisciplinary pediatric expert group of the DGKJ convent societies (status: February 2022)

Das vorliegende Konsensuspapier bietet in Ergänzung zur AWMF-S1-Leitlinie eine Übersicht über die verschiedenen klinischen Aspekte von Long COVID im Kindes- und Jugendalter. Es wurde von Vertreter:innen aus 19 Fachgesellschaften des DGKJ-Konvents und kooperierenden Fachgesellschaften erstellt und bietet Expertenempfehlungen für die Praxis auf Grundlage der bisherigen, noch geringen studienbasierten Evidenz zu Long COVID im Kindes- und Jugendalter. Es enthält Screeningfragen zu Long COVID sowie einen Vorschlag zur strukturierten, standardisierten pädiatrischen Anamnese und zur diagnostischen Evaluation bei V. a. Long COVID. Dazu werden ein zeit- und ressourcensparender Erfassungsbogen, der die Komplexität des Krankheitsbildes berücksichtigt, über die Internetseiten der DGKJ und DGPI zur Verfügung gestellt und weitere Fragebögen zur Abklärung von spezifischen neurokognitiven und/oder psychischen Störungen sowie post-exertioneller Malaise (PEM) und myalgischer Enzephalomyelitis/chronischem Fatigue-Syndrom (ME/CFS) benannt. Anhand der jeweiligen anamnestisch und klinisch ermittelten Hauptsymptome werden ein gestuftes, diagnostisches Vorgehen und eine multidisziplinäre Betreuung empfohlen. Zusatzmaterial online Die Online-Version dieses Beitrags (10.1007/s00112-021-01408-1) enthält weitere Tabellen mit Angaben zur erweiterten Diagnostik (Labor- und Funktionsdiagnostik, Bildgebung).