Cargando…

Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic olfactory loss (IOL) accounts for a sizable fraction of olfactory dysfunction, but very little is known about its etiology and electrophysiological changes in the olfactory pathway. METHODS: We analyzed the physiology of IOL using chemosensory event‐related potentials (ERPs) (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Jia, Pinto, Jayant M., Yang, Ling, Yao, Linyin, Miao, Xutao, Wei, Yongxiang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6282607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29782071
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/alr.22144
_version_ 1783379030794305536
author Liu, Jia
Pinto, Jayant M.
Yang, Ling
Yao, Linyin
Miao, Xutao
Wei, Yongxiang
author_facet Liu, Jia
Pinto, Jayant M.
Yang, Ling
Yao, Linyin
Miao, Xutao
Wei, Yongxiang
author_sort Liu, Jia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Idiopathic olfactory loss (IOL) accounts for a sizable fraction of olfactory dysfunction, but very little is known about its etiology and electrophysiological changes in the olfactory pathway. METHODS: We analyzed the physiology of IOL using chemosensory event‐related potentials (ERPs) (olfactory and trigeminal: oERP and tERP) and olfactory pathway magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measured in adult patients with IOL and healthy controls. Subjective olfactory function was measured by Toyota and Takagi (T&T) olfactometry and Sniffin’ Sticks (SS). RESULTS: Olfactory function was worse in patients with IOL compared to controls (T&T, p < 0.001; SS, p < 0.001). oERPs could be evoked in 17 IOL patients. Signals in these patients showed lower amplitude in the N(1) and P(2) waves than controls (p < 0.05 for both), but there were no difference in latency between the 2 groups (p > 0.05). tERP were detected in all patients and controls; there were no differences in latency and nor amplitude between the 2 groups (p > 0.05). The olfactory bulb (OB) volume was significantly smaller in the IOL group than controls (p < 0.001), but there was no difference in the olfactory sulcus depth between groups (p > 0.05). Better olfactory function was associated with increasing magnitude of N(1) amplitude in oERPs (p < 0.05) and increasing OB volume (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: IOL patients show neurophysiologic deficits and some anatomic differences compared to healthy controls.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6282607
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62826072018-12-11 Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging Liu, Jia Pinto, Jayant M. Yang, Ling Yao, Linyin Miao, Xutao Wei, Yongxiang Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Original Articles BACKGROUND: Idiopathic olfactory loss (IOL) accounts for a sizable fraction of olfactory dysfunction, but very little is known about its etiology and electrophysiological changes in the olfactory pathway. METHODS: We analyzed the physiology of IOL using chemosensory event‐related potentials (ERPs) (olfactory and trigeminal: oERP and tERP) and olfactory pathway magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measured in adult patients with IOL and healthy controls. Subjective olfactory function was measured by Toyota and Takagi (T&T) olfactometry and Sniffin’ Sticks (SS). RESULTS: Olfactory function was worse in patients with IOL compared to controls (T&T, p < 0.001; SS, p < 0.001). oERPs could be evoked in 17 IOL patients. Signals in these patients showed lower amplitude in the N(1) and P(2) waves than controls (p < 0.05 for both), but there were no difference in latency between the 2 groups (p > 0.05). tERP were detected in all patients and controls; there were no differences in latency and nor amplitude between the 2 groups (p > 0.05). The olfactory bulb (OB) volume was significantly smaller in the IOL group than controls (p < 0.001), but there was no difference in the olfactory sulcus depth between groups (p > 0.05). Better olfactory function was associated with increasing magnitude of N(1) amplitude in oERPs (p < 0.05) and increasing OB volume (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: IOL patients show neurophysiologic deficits and some anatomic differences compared to healthy controls. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-05-21 2018-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6282607/ /pubmed/29782071 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/alr.22144 Text en © 2018 The Authors. International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy and American Rhinologic Society This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Liu, Jia
Pinto, Jayant M.
Yang, Ling
Yao, Linyin
Miao, Xutao
Wei, Yongxiang
Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging
title Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging
title_full Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging
title_fullStr Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging
title_short Evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging
title_sort evaluation of idiopathic olfactory loss with chemosensory event‐related potentials and magnetic resonance imaging
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6282607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29782071
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/alr.22144
work_keys_str_mv AT liujia evaluationofidiopathicolfactorylosswithchemosensoryeventrelatedpotentialsandmagneticresonanceimaging
AT pintojayantm evaluationofidiopathicolfactorylosswithchemosensoryeventrelatedpotentialsandmagneticresonanceimaging
AT yangling evaluationofidiopathicolfactorylosswithchemosensoryeventrelatedpotentialsandmagneticresonanceimaging
AT yaolinyin evaluationofidiopathicolfactorylosswithchemosensoryeventrelatedpotentialsandmagneticresonanceimaging
AT miaoxutao evaluationofidiopathicolfactorylosswithchemosensoryeventrelatedpotentialsandmagneticresonanceimaging
AT weiyongxiang evaluationofidiopathicolfactorylosswithchemosensoryeventrelatedpotentialsandmagneticresonanceimaging