OBJECTIVE: To investigate the platelet-rich plasma (PRP) effectiveness in patients with a long-lasting postviral olfactory dysfunction (LPOD).
METHODS: Forty-three consecutive patients with a long-lasting postviral OD were prospectively recruited. The injection of 1 mL of PRP was carried out in both olfactory clefts. The pre- to 6-month post-PRP injection change in olfaction was assessed with the olfactory disorder questionnaire (ODQ) and the threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) tests.
RESULTS: Forty-three patients received bilateral PRP injections (24 females). The mean age of patients was 58.9 ± 16.8 years. The mean duration of LPOD was 8.7 years. The pre to 6-month post-injection mean TDI significantly improved from 10.3 ± 10.2 to 20.12 ± 12.07 (p = 0.001). The mean ODQ significantly decreased from 29.8 ± 13.0 to 23.4 ± 11.3 (p = 0.013). The average change of the TDI and the ODQ were 9.8 and 6.4, respectively. Age was inversely associated with the 6-month threshold score.
CONCLUSIONS: PRP appears to be a promising therapeutic strategy for long-lasting postviral OD. Our findings support the conduction of controlled randomized trial in this population of patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and factors associated with olfactory dysfunction in individuals exposed to Isotretinoin (ISO) for the treatment of acne, using the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT®).
METHODS: This cross-sectional study enrolled age and sex-matched patients with acne who were current users of oral ISO and unexposed controls without olfactory complaints. UPSIT® and a validated questionnaire (Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation) were administered to evaluate nasal obstruction in patients exposed to ISO.
RESULTS: A total of seventy patients were recruited, with 35 in the exposed group and 35 in the unexposed group, consisting of 18 males and 17 females in each group, aged from 17 to 47 years. The prevalence of olfactory dysfunction was higher in the exposed group compared to the non-exposed group (62.9% vs. 17.1%), yielding a Prevalence Ratio (PR) of 3.7 (95% CI 1.9-7.1). However, no participants were categorized as anosmia or severe hyposmia and the majority of dysfunction was mild hyposmia compared to moderate hyposmia (51.5% vs. 11.4%). Among the exposed individuals, gasoline, orange, coffee, and wood exhibited the highest rates of identification errors (≥54%). Olfactory function demonstrated a negative correlation with treatment duration (p = 0.01), cumulative dose (p = 0.02), and nasal obstruction (p = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: Olfactory dysfunction was more prevalent among ISO users, despite the patients being unaware of the disorder. Olfactory changes were correlated with treatment duration, cumulative dose, and nasal obstruction.
METHODS: Level 4.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate long-term prognosis of chemosensory dysfunctions among patients recovering from COVID-19 disease.
METHODS: Between April 2020 and July 2022, we conducted a prospective, observational study enrolling 48 patients who experienced smell and/or taste dysfunction during the acute-phase of COVID-19. Patients were evaluated for chemosensory function up to 24 months after disease onset.
RESULTS: During the acute-phase of COVID-19, 80% of patients reported anosmia, 15% hyposmia, 63% ageusia, and 33% hypogeusia. At two years\' follow-up, 53% still experienced smell impairment, and 42% suffered from taste impairment. Moreover, 63% of patients who reported parosmia remained with olfactory disturbance. Interestingly, we found a negative correlation between visual analogue scale scores for smell and taste impairments during the acute-phase of COVID-19 and the likelihood of long-term recovery.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study sheds light on the natural history and long-term follow-up of chemosensory dysfunction in patients recovering from COVID-19 disease. Most patients who initially suffered from smell and/or taste disturbance did not reach full recovery after 2 years follow-up. The severity of impairment may serve as a prognostic indicator for full recovery.

COVID-19 (Coronavirus), an acute respiratory disorder, is caused by SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome). The high prevalence of COVID-19 infection has drawn attention to a frequent illness symptom: olfactory and gustatory dysfunction. The primary purpose of this manuscript is to create a Computer-Assisted Diagnostic (CAD) system to determine whether a COVID-19 patient has normal, mild, or severe anosmia. To achieve this goal, we used fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (FLAIR-MRI) and Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) to extract the appearance, morphological, and diffusivity markers from the olfactory nerve. The proposed system begins with the identification of the olfactory nerve, which is performed by a skilled expert or radiologist. It then proceeds to carry out the subsequent primary steps: (i) extract appearance markers (i.e., 1 s t and 2 n d order markers), morphology/shape markers (i.e., spherical harmonics), and diffusivity markers (i.e., Fractional Anisotropy (FA) & Mean Diffusivity (MD)), (ii) apply markers fusion based on the integrated markers, and (iii) determine the decision and corresponding performance metrics based on the most-promising classifier. The current study is unusual in that it ensemble bags the learned and fine-tuned ML classifiers and diagnoses olfactory bulb (OB) anosmia using majority voting. In the 5-fold approach, it achieved an accuracy of 94.1%, a balanced accuracy (BAC) of 92.18%, precision of 91.6%, recall of 90.61%, specificity of 93.75%, F1 score of 89.82%, and Intersection over Union (IoU) of 82.62%. In the 10-fold approach, stacking continued to demonstrate impressive results with an accuracy of 94.43%, BAC of 93.0%, precision of 92.03%, recall of 91.39%, specificity of 94.61%, F1 score of 91.23%, and IoU of 84.56%. In the leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) approach, the model continues to exhibit notable outcomes, achieving an accuracy of 91.6%, BAC of 90.27%, precision of 88.55%, recall of 87.96%, specificity of 92.59%, F1 score of 87.94%, and IoU of 78.69%. These results indicate that stacking and majority voting are crucial components of the CAD system, contributing significantly to the overall performance improvements. The proposed technology can help doctors assess which patients need more intensive clinical care.

OBJECTIVE: The new corona virus infection, has a wide range of clinical manifestations. Fever and cough are the most common symptoms. The olfactory function may be also affected with COVID-19. In this randomized clinical trial, we wanted to evaluate the therapeutic effect of olfactory training with and without oral vitamin A for COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction.
METHODS: Patients answered to the standard Persian version of anosmia reporting tool and performed the quick smell test before and after 12 weeks and at the end of the 12 months follow up. The patients were randomly allocated to three groups; Group A treatment with olfactory training, Group B treatment with oral vitamin A and olfactory training, and Group C as control group which only underwent nasal irrigation twice a day. Patients were treated for 3 months and followed up for 12 months.
RESULTS: Totally 90 patients were included in three groups. After interventions, 76.9% of patients in Group A, 86.7% of patients in Group B, and 26.7% of patients in Group C completely improved. The average intervention time was statistically significant in relationship with the final olfactory status of the patients in the 12 months follow-up. The olfactory training has significantly improved the smell alteration at the end of 3- and 12- months follow-up in A and B groups.
CONCLUSIONS: A three-months olfactory training is effective for improvement of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction. Adding daily oral vitamin A to olfactory training did not lead to better results in improving olfactory dysfunction.
METHODS: Step 2 (Level 2*): Randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare, using state-of-the-art psychophysical tests, the olfactory function of patients complaining and not complaining of olfactory hypersensitivity.
METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional.
METHODS: The Smell and Taste Center at the University of Pennsylvania.
METHODS: University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) scores were obtained from 148 patients complaining of hyperosmia and 494 patients with no such complaints; detection threshold test scores were obtained from 77 and 483 patients of these respective groups. The effects of subject group, age, and sex on the test scores were assessed using analyses of variance. Categorical variables were evaluated by χ2. Responses to items within a detailed intake questionnaire, for example, the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II), were also evaluated.
RESULTS: Unexpectedly, those complaining of hyperosmia had lower olfactory test scores than those with no such complaints (respective UPSIT means [95% confidence interval [CIs]] = 27.86 (26.85, 28.87) and 32.19 (31.67, 32.71); P < .001; respective threshold means (log vol/vol) = -4.49 (-4.89, -4.09) and -5.22 (-5.36, -5.06); P < .001). Remarkably, 70.95% of the self-identified hyperosmics exhibited mild to severe microsmia. The hyposmia complainers also exhibited elevated BDI scores (11.02 [9.53, 12.51] vs 7.58 [6.80, 8.34]).
CONCLUSIONS: When objectively tested, many patients who complain of hypersensitivity to odors are actually less sensitive to them. The basis of this phenomenon is unclear. It could reflect the presence of emotionally disturbing altered smell sensations, or one or more comorbidities, such as hypochondria or osmophobia. These findings point to the importance of objective testing of persons with complaints of chemosensory dysfunction and reiterate the inaccuracy of self-reports.

BACKGROUND: Persistent post-COVID olfactory dysfunction continues to be studied due to the controversy in its pathophysiology and neuroimaging.
METHODS: The patients had confirmed mild COVID-19 infection with olfactory dysfunction of more than one month of evolution and they were compared to controls with normal olfaction, assessed using the Sniffin\' Sticks Olfactory Test and underwent brain, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the olfactory bulb and olfactory function.
RESULTS: A total of 8 patients and 2 controls participated. The average age of the patients was 34.5 years (SD 8.5), and that of the controls was 28.5 (SD 2.1). The average score in the patients\' olfactory test was 7.9 points (SD 2.2). In brain and olfactory bulb MRI tests, no morphological differences were found. When evaluated by functional MRI, none of the patients activated the entorhinal area in comparison to the controls, who did show activation at this level. Activation of secondary olfactory areas in cases and controls were as follows: orbitofrontal (25% vs 100%), basal ganglia (25% vs 50%) and insula (38% vs 0%) respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: There were no observed morphological changes in the brain MRI. Unlike the controls, none of the patients activated the entorhinal cortex in the olfactory functional MRI.

Despite the recent advances in understanding the mechanisms of olfaction, no tools are currently available to noninvasively identify loss of smell. Because of the substantial increase in patients presenting with coronavirus disease 2019-related loss of smell, the pandemic has highlighted the urgent need to develop quantitative methods. Methods: Our group investigated the use of a novel fluorescent probe named Tsp1a-IR800P as a tool to diagnose loss of smell. Tsp1a-IR800P targets sodium channel 1.7, which plays a critical role in olfaction by aiding the signal propagation to the olfactory bulb. Results: Intuitively, we have identified that conditions leading to loss of smell, including chronic inflammation and coronavirus disease 2019, correlate with the downregulation of sodium channel 1.7 expression in the olfactory epithelium, both at the transcript and at the protein levels. We demonstrated that lower Tsp1a-IR800P fluorescence emissions significantly correlate with loss of smell in live animals-thus representing a potential tool for its semiquantitative assessment. Currently available methods rely on delayed subjective behavioral studies. Conclusion: This method could aid in significantly improving preclinical and clinical studies by providing a way to objectively diagnose loss of smell and therefore aid the development of therapeutic interventions.

UNASSIGNED: Olfactory disorders significantly affect individuals, diminishing their capacity to detect dangers, appreciate flavors, and engage socially. Despite their considerable impact on quality of life, these disorders often receive less attention compared to other sensory impairments. This review emphasizes the importance of olfactory function and explores both traditional and innovative diagnostic and therapeutic approaches.
UNASSIGNED: This review comprehensively covers the pathophysiology, diagnostic challenges, and treatment options for olfactory disorders. It delves into the nuances of different disorders, such as anosmia and parosmia, and discusses the array of diagnostic tools from traditional sniff tests to advanced imaging techniques. The review also evaluates therapeutic strategies, from pharmacological treatments to emerging therapies like electrical stimulation and regenerative medicine, highlighting recent advances in the field.
UNASSIGNED: Current insights suggest a growing recognition of the significance of olfactory disorders, driven by recent pandemics and advances in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies. Future perspectives indicate a promising direction toward more personalized medicine approaches and enhanced regenerative therapies. Continuous research and improved clinical awareness are critical for evolving the management strategies of olfactory impairments, potentially leading to better patient outcomes and quality of life enhancements.

Smell loss affects around 15-20% of the population, with a major effect on the quality of life. The most common complaint is the impairment of the eating experience, with around 90% of patients reporting this issue. A study conducted at a specialised Taste and Smell Clinic investigated if food and cooking can positively affect the enjoyment of food, subjective cooking skills, and quality of life in patients with smell loss. The 49 participants in the study received a 5-week cooking school course that focused on emphasizing the other senses to regain the enjoyment of food. Participants gained more confidence in cooking, and their quality of life improved significantly. Positively evaluated recipes were adjusted based on feedback and published as free e-books in Danish, German, and English. Eating and cooking are multisensory experiences, and the perception of food depends on the complex interaction of senses and surroundings. If the olfactory input is reduced or absent, both the enjoyment and cooking experience can be negatively affected. Therefore, focusing on food and cooking can have a positive impact on patients with smell loss.