Olfactory Function and Olfactory Disorders. / Riechen und Riechstörungen.

The sense of smell is important. This became especially clear to patients with infection-related olfactory loss during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We react, for example, to the body odors of other humans. The sense of smell warns us of danger, and it allows us to perceive flavors when eating and drinking. In essence, this means quality of life. Therefore, anosmia must be taken seriously. Although olfactory receptor neurons are characterized by regenerative capacity, anosmia is relatively common with about 5 % of anosmic people in the general population. Olfactory disorders are classified according to their causes (e. g., infections of the upper respiratory tract, traumatic brain injury, chronic rhinosinusitis, age) with the resulting different therapeutic options and prognoses. Thorough history taking is therefore important. A wide variety of tools are available for diagnosis, ranging from short screening tests and detailed multidimensional test procedures to electrophysiological and imaging methods. Thus, quantitative olfactory disorders are easily assessable and traceable. For qualitative olfactory disorders such as parosmia, however, no objectifying diagnostic procedures are currently available. Therapeutic options for olfactory disorders are limited. Nevertheless, there are effective options consisting of olfactory training as well as various additive drug therapies. The consultation and the competent discussion with the patients are of major importance.

Future therapeutic strategies for olfactory disorders: electrical stimulation, stem cell therapy, and transplantation of olfactory epithelium-an overview.

Olfactory disorders may be temporary or permanent and can have various causes. Currently, many COVID-19 patients report a reduced or complete loss of olfactory function. A wide range of treatment options have been investigated in the past, such as olfactory training, acupuncture, medical therapy, transcranial magnetic stimulation, or surgical excision of olfactory epithelium, e.g., in severe qualitative smell disorders. The development of a bioelectric nose, e.g., in connection with direct electrical stimulation or transplantation of olfactory epithelium or stem cells, represent treatment options of the future. The basis of these developments and the state of knowledge is discussed in the following work.

Real-world-effectiveness of biological treatment for severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

BACKGROUND: During the last two years, three different monoclonal antibodies have been approved in many countries for the treatment of patients suffering from severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Their efficacy has been demonstrated through large double-blind placebo-controlled clinical studies. Until now, only very limited reports on real-world data regarding this therapy have been published. METHODS: This per protocol analysis included patients with an indication for biological treatment because of uncontrolled CRSwNP, despite long-term nasal steroid treatment, systemic steroid use and/ or endonasal sinus surgery. Baseline data on demographics, medical history and comorbidities, polyp score, quality of life and sense of smell (using Sniffin' Sticks) were assessed and a treatment with either dupilumab or omalizumab was started. The patients were followed up after three and six months. The changes in polyp score, quality-of-life measures and olfaction were noted. RESULTS: 70 consecutive patients were evaluated during the study. Of the patients, 49 were treated with dupilumab and 21 with omalizumab. The polyp score decreased significantly after three and six months, and the quality-of-life parameters and olfaction increased. More than 90% of patients showed a moderate to excellent response to the therapy and there was no difference in the overall response between the two treatments. Olfaction improved in two thirds of the patients, but one third was still anosmic after six months treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study shows the effectiveness of the monoclonal antibodies dupilumab and omalizumab in the treatment of severe CRSwNP. Nasal polyp scores and quality-of-life parameters as well as measured olfactory function were improved after just three months. The response after guideline-based criteria was insufficient only in 5 patients of this cohort.

Reliability and validity of a brief version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (brief QOD) in patients with olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the reliability and validity of the brief version of Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (brief QOD). METHODS: A total of 372 patients participated in this study. Olfactory function was examined using the Sniffin' Sticks test. The brief version of QOD, including 4 items concerning parosmia (QOD-P), 7 items concerning quality of life (QOD-QOL), and 3 visual analog scales to rate disease burden, awareness of the disorder and issues related to professional life (QOD-VAS), was used to assess subjective information on olfactory dysfunction. We evaluated the split-half reliability, internal consistency and validity of the brief QOD. RESULTS: The split-half reliability was 0.60 (QOD-P), 0.87 (QOD-QOL), and 0.66 (QOD-VAS), respectively. The Cronbach's coefficient was 0.63 (QOD-P), 0.87 (QOD-QOL), and 0.71 (QOD-VAS), respectively. Olfactory function was found to be associated with QOD-P, QOD-QOL and QOD-VAS. CONCLUSIONS: The brief QOD is a suitable scale for the assessment of subjective severity of olfactory dysfunction for purposes such as treatment counseling, disability assessment, treatment control, and research in patients with olfactory disorder.

[Future therapeutic strategies for olfactory disorders: electrical stimulation, stem cell therapy, and transplantation of olfactory epithelium-an overview]. / Zukunftsweisende Therapieansätze bei Riechstörungen: elektrische Stimulation, Stammzelltherapie und Transplantation von Riechepithel ­ eine Übersicht.

Olfactory disorders may be temporary or permanent and can have various causes. Currently, many COVID-19 patients report a reduced or complete loss of olfactory function. A wide range of treatment options have been investigated in the past, such as olfactory training, acupuncture, medical therapy, transcranial magnetic stimulation, or surgical excision of olfactory epithelium, e.g., in severe qualitative smell disorders. The development of a bioelectric nose, e.g., in connection with direct electrical stimulation or transplantation of olfactory epithelium or stem cells, represent treatment options of the future. The basis of these developments and the state of knowledge is discussed in the following work.

Intranasal sodium citrate in quantitative and qualitative olfactory dysfunction: results from a prospective, controlled trial of prolonged use in 60 patients.

OBJECTIVES: We have previously shown that treatment with intranasal sodium citrate may be beneficial in post-infectious olfactory dysfunction. Sodium citrate reduces free intranasal calcium and is, therefore, thought to prevent calcium-mediated feedback inhibition at the level of the olfactory receptor. We aimed to determine whether treatment with a 2-week course of intranasal sodium citrate improves quantitative olfactory function in patients with post-infectious impairment. We also aimed to determine whether sodium citrate is beneficial in treating qualitative olfactory dysfunction. METHODS: We performed a prospective, controlled study. Patients applied intranasal sodium citrate solution to the right nasal cavity for 2 weeks. The left nasal cavity was untreated and, therefore, acted as an internal control. Monorhinal olfactory function was assessed using the "Sniffin' Sticks" composite 'TDI' score, before and after treatment. The presence of parosmia and phantosmia was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, there was a significant increase in TDI after treatment (using the best of right and left sides). Treatment with sodium citrate did not significantly improve quantitative olfactory function, compared to control. The proportion of patients reporting parosmia did not change significantly after treatment. However, there was a significant reduction in the proportion of patients reporting phantosmia, at the end of the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with intranasal sodium citrate for a period of 2 weeks does not appear to improve quantitative olfactory function in patients with post-infectious impairment, compared to control. It may, however, be beneficial in treating phantosmia, which should be further addressed in future work.