Possibilities of using the domestic olfactory test in the diagnosis of typical olfactory disorders
Authors:   I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation, Lebedeva G.V. , Svistushkin M.V. ,   I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation, Selezneva L.V. ,   I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation, Kudryavtseva V.A. ,   I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation, Pogosyan K.K. ,   I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation, Zinchenko I.A. ,   I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation, Svistushkin V.M. ,   I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation
Published: October 2024

Background: the diagnosis of olfactory disorders remains a critical issue in clinical practice. Olfactory testing is the most commonly utilized diagnostic tool. Previously, we developed an olfactory test and validated it on healthy volunteers. Aim: to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of a domestic olfactory test in detecting various olfactory disorders. Materials and Methods: this study included 100 patients presenting with typical olfactory disorders. Subjects were categorized into three groups: acute rhinosinusitis (AR) (n=50), polypous rhinosinusitis (PR) (n=25), and post-viral olfactory dysfunction (PVDO) (n=25). Olfactory function was assessed using the developed test and a visual analog scale (VAS) for comparative analysis. Olfactory threshold and odor discrimination ability were measured in all groups using the olfactory test. In the PR and PVDO groups, the assessment was conducted once on the examination day. In the AR group, assessments were performed twice: on the day of treatment and 14 days post-treatment. Results: olfactory dysfunction was detected in all groups. In the AR group, both the VAS and the domestic olfactory test indicated a decrease in olfactory threshold without changes in odor discrimination ability. Fourteen days post-treatment, improvements in olfactory threshold and odor discrimination were noted, although VAS scores demonstrated a decline. In the PR and PVDO groups, both VAS and the domestic olfactory test showed reductions in olfactory threshold and odor discrimination abilities. VAS results highly correlated with the olfactory threshold across all groups, and additionally with odor discrimination ability in the PVDO group. Conclusion: the study demonstrated the effectiveness of the domestic olfactory test in diagnosing typical olfactory disorders. KEYWORDS: olfaction, olfactory test, olfactory diagnostics, olfactory threshold, odor discrimination ability, acute rhinosinusitis, polypous rhinosinusitis, post-viral olfactory dysfunction, odor. FOR CITATION: Lebedeva G.V., Svistushkin M.V., Selezneva L.V., Kudryavtseva V.A., Pogosyan K.K., Zinchenko I.A., Svistushkin V.M. Possibilities of using the domestic olfactory test in the diagnosis of typical olfactory disorders. Russian Medical Inquiry. 2024;8(8):470–476 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.32364/2587-6821-2024-8-8-5.