Retro- and orthonasal olfactory function in relation to olfactory bulb volume in patients with hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism

Introduction

Idiopathic hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism with an olfactory deficit is defined as Kallmann syndrome and is distinct from normosmic idiopathic hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism.

Retronasal olfactory function in nasal polyposis

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the question of whether there is a difference in retronasal olfactory function between patients suffering from chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (NP) and healthy controls. This question was based on the clinical observation that many of these patients present with smell loss without complaining about loss of the appreciation of foods. STUDY DESIGN: Open prospective study comparing symptomatic patients with healthy controls. METHODS: A total of 56 healthy volunteers and 42 NP patients were tested for orthonasal and retronasal odor identification. All subjects received detailed nasal endoscopy; NP was staged according to the Malm classification. Patients rated their olfactory function on visual analogue scales. Orthonasal testing was performed using the "Sniffin' Sticks" test kit. Retronasal testing was evaluated with odorized powders applied to the oral cavity. In both tests, subjects were asked to identify 10 items using a forced choice paradigm. RESULTS: Overall, odor identification was better in controls compared with NP patients (P <.001). Although controls exhibited no difference between orthonasal and retronasal smelling (P =.26), in NP patients, olfactory function was significantly better when odors were applied through the retronasal route (P <.001). Ratings of general olfactory abilities correlated with retronasal and orthonasal olfactory function in NP patients (P <.001) but not in healthy controls (P =.34). CONCLUSION: Better retronasal than orthonasal olfactory function seems to be associated with the presence of mechanical obstruction in the anterior portion of the olfactory cleft. In turn, these data indicate that olfactory loss in NP seems to be caused by regional mechanical or inflammatory factors.     

Clinical significance of olfactory event-related potentials related to orthonasal and retronasal olfactory testing

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the likelihood of recording olfactory event-related potentials (OERPs) in patients with an olfactory dysfunction and to correlate the electrophysiological responses to orthonasal and retronasal olfactory testing. DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study of 65 patients with different origins of their olfactory loss. Orthonasal olfactory function was assessed with the "Sniffin' Sticks" test (orthonasal score; maximal score 48) and retronasal olfactory function with odorized powders presented intraorally (retronasal score; maximal score 20). The OERPs were obtained after presentation of 2-phenyl ethyl alcohol, the selected olfactory stimulus. Causes of olfactory dysfunction included postinfectious olfactory loss (n = 15), head trauma (n = 26), nasal polyposis (n = 15), and mixed causes (idiopathic, toxic, drug induced) (n = 9). RESULTS: Based on orthonasal testing, 32 and 33 patients were diagnosed with anosmia and hyposmia, respectively. Twenty-two patients from the hyposmic group demonstrated reliable OERPs. No OERPs were recorded in the anosmic group. Prevalence of OERPs in a cohort of patients with olfactory dysfunction was 33.8% (22 of 65). Median score (expressed as the percentage of the maximal score that could be obtained theoretically) in which OERPs were recorded was 50% (24 of 48) with orthonasal testing and 80% (16 of 20) with retronasal testing. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with olfactory dysfunction usually demonstrate OERPs in one third of the cases. When olfactory dysfunction is in the range that separates normosmic subjects from anosmic patients, patients may have identifiable OERPs. Interpretation of both orthonasal and retronasal psychophysical olfactory testing should be supported by the recording of OERPs in a clinical setting.     

Comparison of diagnostic findings using different olfactory test methods

OBJECTIVE: To quantify discrepancies in the diagnosis of olfactory function that might exist when comparing results obtained from centers using different methods of olfactory testing. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study of 50 healthy adult volunteers and 25 adult patients with olfactory complaints. METHODS: Two test methods, the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) test widely used in the United States, and the Jet Stream Olfactometer (JSO) test used in Japan, were used to measure and categorize the diagnostic level of olfactory function (normosmia, mild hyposmia, moderate hyposmia, severe hyposmia, anosmia). Olfactory function was measured separately for each nostril. RESULTS: There was a significant correlation (rs = 0.788, P < .01, n = 150 nostrils) between diagnostic categories assigned by the CCCRC and JSO test methods. Diagnostic categories were identical for 66.7% of the nostrils tested, and in only 7.3% of the cases did the results differ by more than one category. For the anosmic and normosmic categories, test results were in agreement 91.7% of the time, whereas for the hyposmic categories (mild, moderate, and severe) results were in agreement only 22.2% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that when comparing clinical or research data obtained from centers using different olfactory test methods, subjects with diagnoses of anosmia or normosmia may be more reliably compared than those with different levels of hyposmia.     

Correspondence between three olfactory tests and suprathreshold odor intensity ratings

OBJECTIVES: The capability of three olfactory tests (European Test of Olfactory Capabilities, Sniffin' Sticks and Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test) to similarly classify subjects as normosmics, hyposmics and anosmics as well as the relation between test performance and suprathreshold ortho- and retronasal odor intensity ratings were examined. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 48 subjects (age range 15-84 years; mean age 49.5 years) completed the 3 olfactory tests, rated aqueous solutions of vanilla (0-0.31%) and lemon aroma (0-0.17%) for odor and flavor intensity and filled in a background questionnaire. Ten subjects had case histories indicating anosmia, with the remainder having subjectively normal olfaction. RESULTS: The test results were highly correlated and differentiated anosmic, hyposmic and normosmic subjects. At an individual level, some discrepancy was seen in the olfactory diagnoses given by the three tests. In principal component analysis, olfactory measurements were loaded on three components: (i) odor detection, discrimination and identification; (ii) suprathreshold intensity ratings; and (iii) threshold for n-butanol. Advanced age was related to impaired olfactory performance. CONCLUSIONS: Although the three olfactory tests diagnosed the individuals slightly differently, all were considered to be valid for clinical evaluation of olfactory capabilities. The tests separated anosmics and normosmics highly significantly, and permitted an assessment of hyposmia. The suprathreshold odor intensity ratings reflected a different dimension of olfaction than the three olfactory tests.     

Correspondence Between Three Olfactory Tests and Suprathreshold Odor Intensity Ratings

Objectives —The capability of three olfactory tests (European Test of Olfactory Capabilities, Sniffin’ Sticks and Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test) to similarly classify subjects as normosmics, hyposmics and anosmics as well as the relation between test performance and suprathreshold ortho- and retronasal odor intensity ratings were examined.

Material and Methods —A total of 48 subjects (age range 15–84 years; mean age 49.5 years) completed the 3 olfactory tests, rated aqueous solutions of vanilla (0–0.31%) and lemon aroma (0–0.17%) for odor and flavor intensity and filled in a background questionnaire. Ten subjects had case histories indicating anosmia, with the remainder having subjectively normal olfaction.

Results —The test results were highly correlated and differentiated anosmic, hyposmic and normosmic subjects. At an individual level, some discrepancy was seen in the olfactory diagnoses given by the three tests. In principal component analysis, olfactory measurements were loaded on three components: (i) odor detection, discrimination and identification; (ii) suprathreshold intensity ratings; and (iii) threshold for n-butanol. Advanced age was related to impaired olfactory performance.

Conclusions —Although the three olfactory tests diagnosed the individuals slightly differently, all were considered to be valid for clinical evaluation of olfactory capabilities. The tests separated anosmics and normosmics highly significantly, and permitted an assessment of hyposmia. The suprathreshold odor intensity ratings reflected a different dimension of olfaction than the three olfactory tests.     

Can we smell without an olfactory bulb?

BACKGROUND: Lack of an olfactory bulb (OB) is typically associated with anosmia. METHODS: We present a patient with subnormal olfactory function in whom the OB could not be detected with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS: Olfactory function was evaluated on two occasions. Orthonasal olfactory function was assessed with the "Sniffin' Sticks" test providing a score equivalent to hyposmia. Retronasal olfactory function was studied with "smell powders" indicating a decreased, but not absence of, olfactory function. Importantly, chemosensory event-related potentials were clearly present in response to olfactory and trigeminal stimuli. CONCLUSION: This indicates that olfactory function may be present in some subjects even when an OB can not be detected with MRI.     

How do children with adenoid hypertrophy smell and taste? Clinical assessment of olfactory function pre- and post-adenoidectomy

OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability to smell and appreciate food in children with adenoid hypertrophy pre and post-adenoidectomy. METHODS: A total of 35 children with adenoid hypertrophy admitted for adenoidectomy (aged 5-9.3 years, mean age 5.9 years) were tested preoperatively. In a follow up appointment 3 months postoperatively, 28 of them returned and were tested again. The control group consisted of 30 healthy children (aged 5-10.2 years, mean age 6.1 years). Orthonasal olfactory function was assessed psychophysically using "Sniffin sticks" 12 item odor identification test. Retronasal olfaction was assessed using a collection of 12 grocery available powders applied to the oral cavity. RESULTS: Both orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function of the study group preoperatively were significantly lower in comparison with the results of the control group (p<0.0001). The difference in retronasal olfaction between groups was significantly higher in comparison with the difference in orthonasal odor identification (p=0.048). There is a strong correlation between adenoid hypertrophy grade and retronasal testing results (t=-5.461, p<0.0001), but not with the orthonasal results (t=-1.677, p=0.9). Significant improvement of orthonasal and retronasal olfaction was observed in the follow-up appointment (p<0.0001). Relative increase postoperatively was higher for the retronasal olfaction compared to orthonasal olfaction (p=0.0029). CONCLUSIONS: Children with adenoid hypertrophy have a reduced ability to smell, with retronasal olfactory function being more affected. Surgery had a greater impact on retronasal olfaction.     

Lipoic acid in the treatment of smell dysfunction following viral infection of the upper respiratory tract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The study aimed to investigate the potential therapeutic effects of alpha-lipoic acid in olfactory loss following infections of the upper respiratory tract. Possible mechanisms of actions include the release of nerve growth factor and antioxidative effects, both of which may be helpful in the regeneration of olfactory receptor neurons. STUDY DESIGN: Unblinded, prospective clinical trial. METHODS: A total of 23 patients participated (13 women, 10 men; mean age 57 y, age range 22-79 y; mean duration of olfactory loss, 14 mo; range, 4 to 33 mo); 19 of them were hyposmic and 4 had functional anosmia. Alpha-lipoic acid was used orally at a dose of 600 mg/day; it was prescribed for an average period of 4.5 months. Olfactory function was assessed using olfactory tests for phenyl ethyl alcohol odor threshold, odor discrimination, and odor identification. RESULTS: Seven patients (30%) showed no change in olfactory function. Two patients (9%) exhibited a moderate decrease in olfactory function; in contrast, six patients (26%) showed moderate and eight patients (35%) remarkable increase in olfactory function. Two of the 4 patients with functional anosmia reached hyposmia; 5 of 19 hyposmic patients became normosmic. Overall, this resulted in a significant improvement in olfactory function following treatment (P =.002). At the end of treatment parosmias were less frequent (22%) than at the beginning of therapy (48%). Interestingly, recovery of olfactory function appeared to be more pronounced in younger patients than in patients above the age of 60 years (P =.018). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that alpha-lipoic acid may be helpful in patients with olfactory loss after upper respiratory tract infection. However, to judge the true potential of this treatment, the outcome of double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in large groups of patients must be awaited, especially when considering the relatively high rate of spontaneous recovery in olfactory loss after upper respiratory tract infection.     

Testing olfaction in a clinical setting

Assessment of olfactory functioning at the CCCRC entails a threshold test and an odor identification test that contains eight everyday items. A performance average on the two tests yields a composite score on a scale from 0 (anosmia) to 7 (normosmia). The performance of normal volunteers is stable over most of an individual's life span, but decreases for persons over the age of 65 years. Approximately half the patients with olfactory complaints display anosmia, and the other half have hyposmia. The distribution of scores, however, varies with etiologic category, emplified by the fact that patients with nasal/sinus disease display anosmia more frequently than hyposmia. The tests can determine cause (e.g., improvement of score with corticosteroid treatment in cases of nasal/sinus disease) and can also assess degree of improvement with treatment, such as sinus operation.     

Multicenter investigation of 1,036 subjects using a standardized method for the assessment of olfactory function combining tests of odor identification, odor discrimination, and olfactory thresholds

“Sniffin’ Sticks” is a test of nasal chemosensory performance that is based on penlike odor-dispensing devices. It is comprised of three tests of olfactory function: tests for odor threshold, discrimination and identification. Previous work has already established its test-retest reliability and validity in comparison to established measures of olfactory sensitivity. The results of this test are presented as a composite TDI score – i.e., the sum of results obtained for threshold, discrimination and identification measures. The present multicenter investigation aimed at providing normative values in relation to different age groups. To this end, 966 patients were investigated in 11 centers. An additional study tried to establish values for the identification of anosmic patients, with 70 anosmics investigated in five specialized centers where the presence of anosmia was confirmed by means of olfactory evoked potentials. For healthy subjects, the TDI score at the 10th percentile was 24.5 in subjects younger than 15 years, 30.3 for ages from 16 to 35 years, 28.8 for ages from 36 to 55 years and 27.5 for subjects older than 55 years. While these data can be used to estimate individual olfactory abilities in relation to a subject’s age, hyposmia was defined as the 10th percentile score of 16- to 35-year-old subjects. Our latter study revealed that none of 70 anosmics reached a TDI score higher than 15. This score of 15 is regarded as the cut-off value for functional anosmia. These results provide the basis for the routine clinical evaluation of patients with olfactory disorders using “Sniffin’ Sticks.” Received: 29 May 1999 / Accepted: 9 September 1999     

Normative data for the “Sniffin’ Sticks” including tests of odor identification,odor discrimination,and olfactory thresholds: an upgrade based on a group of more than 3,000 subjects

“Sniffin’ Sticks” is a test of nasal chemosensory function that is based on pen-like odor dispensing devices, introduced some 10 years ago by Kobal and co-workers. It consists of tests for odor threshold, discrimination, and identification. Previous work established its test-retest reliability and validity. Results of the test are presented as “TDI score”, the sum of results obtained for threshold, discrimination, and identification measures. While normative data have been established they are based on a relatively small number of subjects, especially with regard to subjects older than 55 years where data from only 30 healthy subjects have been used. The present study aimed to remedy this situation. Now data are available from 3,282 subjects as compared to data from 738 subjects published previously. Disregarding sex-related differences, the TDI score at the tenth percentile was 24.9 in subjects younger than 15 years, 30.3 for ages from 16 to 35 years, 27.3 for ages from 36 to 55 years, and 19.6 for subjects older than 55 years. Because the tenth percentile has been defined to separate hyposmia from normosmia, these data can be used as a guide to estimate individual olfactory ability in relation to subject’s age. Absolute hyposmia was defined as the tenth percentile score of 16–35 year old subjects. Other than previous reports the present norms are also sex-differentiated with women outperforming men in the three olfactory tests. Further, the present data suggest specific changes of individual olfactory functions in relation to age, with odor thresholds declining most dramatically compared to odor discrimination and odor identification.     

Identifying normosmics: a comparison of two populations

An olfactory function test developed by the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) was administered to 65 normal subjects to determine its ability to identify normosmic subjects. The CCCRC test categorizes individuals into five distinct levels of olfactory functioning according to composite score ranges derived from odor identification and butanol threshold subtests. These categories are: normosmic (normal); mildly, moderately, and severely hyposmic (impaired functioning); and anosmic (no sensation). Comparing score distributions from CCCRC with ours revealed that a greater percentage of our subjects were categorized as hyposmic because of higher butanol thresholds. The butanol threshold subtest was studied further to determine test-retest reliability and normal day-to-day variability in scores. Norms are the basis for interpreting test scores and are important in diagnosing and treating smell disorders.     

Screening of olfactory function using the Biolfa olfactory test: investigations in patients with dysosmia

OBJECTIVE: To present a statistical evaluation of a new olfactory test, Biolfa. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The olfactory test was carried out in individuals with normal olfactory function (n=67; 31 males; mean age 27.4 years) and in patients with mild, moderate or severe hyposmia (n=155; 61 males; mean age 54.6 years). The main diagnoses of the hyposmic patients were upper respiratory tract infection (32%), nasal polyposis (24%), head trauma (8%), idiopathic (8%), old age (5%) and chronic rhinitis (5%). In the first part of the test, olfactory thresholds were measured for three different substances (eugenol, aldehyde C14 and phenyl ethyl alcohol). The second part comprised an odor identification test for determining olfactory function for a large panel of common odors of Southern European countries. RESULTS: Mean olfactory thresholds were determined for subjects with normal olfaction and hyposmic patients; there was a statistically significant relationship between olfactory thresholds and degree of olfaction (mild to moderate hyposmia versus severe hyposmia). For the odor identification test, a global score was determined to allow the differentiation of normosmic subjects from patients with mild, moderate or severe hyposmia. The principles of decision theory (i.e. analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve) were applied to the problem of evaluating the ability of Biolfa to distinguish subnormal subjects from hyposmic subjects. CONCLUSION: This study provides a basis for the routine clinical use of Biolfa.     

Olfactory function assessed with orthonasal and retronasal testing, olfactory bulb volume, and chemosensory event-related potentials

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether differences in olfactory function between healthy individuals and patients with olfactory loss could be detected by various diagnostic tests. DESIGN: Psychophysical testing of orthonasal and retronasal olfactory functions, magnetic resonance imaging of olfactory bulb (OB) volume, and chemosensory event-related potential (ERP) measurement performed between January 1, 2005, and October 31, 2005. SETTING: Academic tertiary referral medical center. PATIENTS: Eleven healthy individuals with normal olfactory function (NL) and 11 patients with nasal polyposis (NP), 11 with posttraumatic olfactory loss (PT), and 11 with postinfectious olfactory loss (PI) were included in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Orthonasal and retronasal olfactory test results, magnetic resonance imaging-based OB volume, and ERPs to both olfactory and intranasal trigeminal stimulation. RESULTS: Orthonasal and retronasal testing revealed that NL individuals had higher scores than patients with NP, PT, or PI. Retronasal scores were higher in NP patients compared with PT and PI patients. The OB volumes were higher in NL individuals compared with NP, PT, and PI patients. The OB volumes in PT patients were significantly lower than those from NP and PI patients. Olfactory ERPs were different between NL individuals and NP, PT, and PI patients, and trigeminal ERPs were significantly different when comparing NL individuals with NP patients. For the entire cohort, a significant correlation was found between orthonasal testing and OB volume, between retronasal testing and OB volume, and between both orthonasal and retronasal testing and olfactory ERP amplitudes. Olfactory ERPs were recorded in the 11 NL individuals and in 3 NP, 3 PT, and 4 PI patients, defined as responders. Orthonasal and retronasal test scores, OB volume, and olfactory ERPs were significantly larger in responders compared with nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in various tests that evaluate olfactory function were detectable in a cohort of NL individuals and NP, PT, and PI patients. This finding suggests that these diagnostic tools provide information in terms of the clinical assessment of olfactory function. Future studies will investigate their combined use in terms of the prognosis of olfactory function in patients with olfactory loss.     

Clinical significance of results from olfactory testing

BACKGROUND: Although widely used in healthy subjects and patients with olfactory loss, the significance of changes of scores from validated olfactory tests is unknown. AIM AND METHODS: The aim of the present study was to relate the self-assigned changes of olfactory function in terms of "better," "unchanged," and "worse" in patients with smell disorders with the results from olfactory testing by means of a validated test set. Olfactory function of 83 anosmic or hyposmic patients (40 women, 43 men; age 12-84 yr) was tested on two occasions (mean interval 136 days, minimum 7 days, maximum 6.7 yr). Olfactory function was assessed using a validated technique ("Sniffin' Sticks"). This test consists of three subtests, one for odor threshold (T), odor discrimination (D), and odor identification (I), with possible results ranging up to 16 points each. From the sum of the results from the three subtests a composite "TDI" score was obtained. RESULTS: Forty-four patients indicated an improvement of olfactory function, whereas 39 patients reported no change. No subject reported deterioration of olfactory sensitivity. Subjects assigned to group BETTER had higher TDI scores in the second olfactory tests than subjects assigned to the group UNCHANGED, both in absolute terms and as compared with the first olfactory test (effect "test occasion" by "self-assessed improvement," P < .001). There was no significant difference between groups with respect to age and sex (P = .99 and .84, respectively). Logistic regression showed that more than 60% of the subjects reported an improvement of olfactory sensitivity when the TDI score increased by 5.5 points. CONCLUSION: We show that there is a statistically significant relation between measured and perceived improvement of olfactory function in patients who first presented with the diagnosis of anosmia or hyposmia. The results indicate that improved olfactory function in patients with olfactory deficiency is perceived as such in everyday life and is quantitatively related to an improvement in the composite TDI score of the "Sniffin' Sticks" olfactory test battery. This is the basis for the application of a specific therapy for olfactory loss because of a possible gain in quality of life for the patients.     

Application of the European Test of Olfactory Capabilities in patients with olfactory impairment

A central issue in olfaction concerns the characterization of loss of olfactory function: partial (hyposmia) or total (anosmia). This paper reports the application in a clinical setting of the European Test of Olfactory Capabilities (ETOC), combining odor detection and identification. The study included three phases. In phase 1, anosmics, hyposmics and controls were tested with the 16-items version of the ETOC. In phase 2, a short version of the ETOC was developed: patients with and controls without olfactory impairment were tested on a 6-items ETOC. In phase 3, to predict olfactory impairments in new individuals, the 16-items ETOC was administered on samples of young and older adults, and the 6-items version was applied in samples of young, elderly participants and Alzheimer patients. In phase 1, linear discriminant analysis (LDA) of ETOC scores classified patients and controls with 87.5 % accuracy. In phase 2, LDA provided 84 % correct classification. Results of phase 3 revealed: (1) 16-items ETOC: whereas in young adults, 10 % were classified as hyposmic and 90 % as normosmic, in elderly, 1 % were classified as anosmic, 39 % hyposmic and 60 % normosmic; (2) 6-items ETOC: 15 % of the young adults were classified as having olfactory impairment, compared to 28 % in the older group and 83 % in Alzheimer patients. In conclusion, the ETOC enables characterizing the prevalence of olfactory impairment in young subjects and in normal and pathological aging. Whereas the 16-items ETOC is more discriminant, the short ETOC may provide a fast (5–10 min) tool to assess olfaction in clinical settings.     

Non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction: A cohort of 496 patients

Introduction and aimThere is a high prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in the general population. Several causes of olfactory dysfunction have been reported and this disorder is classically divided into sinonasal and non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction. The aims of this study were firstly, to evaluate the frequency of the various aetiologies of olfactory dysfunction in a population of patients with non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction and secondly, to evaluate the degree of olfactory impairment associated with these various aetiologies.Material and methodsWe retrospectively reviewed a cohort of 496 patients with non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction. The aetiology of the olfactory dysfunction was recorded for each patient. The aetiology was determined by a complete clinical assessment, including medical history, complete otorhinolaryngological examination, psychophysical testing of olfactory function, recording of olfactory event-related potentials and brain magnetic resonance imaging. Six groups of patients were defined on the basis of the aetiology of the disease and orthonasal and retronasal psychophysical olfactory performances were evaluated in each group.ResultsPost-infectious and post-traumatic aetiologies were the most common causes, representing 37.9% and 33.1% of patients, respectively, followed by idiopathic (16.3%), congenital (5.9%), toxic (3.4%) and neurological (3.4%) olfactory dysfunction. Anosmia was significantly more frequent in congenital (93.1%) and post-traumatic (62.8%) olfactory dysfunction, whereas hyposmia was more frequent in the post-infectious group (59.6%). Orthonasal and retronasal olfactory function tests were significantly correlated in all groups except for the congenital group.ConclusionsThe data of this study confirm that the most common causes of non-sinonasal-related olfactory dysfunction are post-infectious and post-traumatic. Post-infectious olfactory dysfunction is mainly observed in middle-aged women and is mainly associated with hyposmia, whereas post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction is mainly observed in young men and is associated with a high rate of anosmia.