A preliminary study on the causes of olfactory dysfunction following aesthetic rhinoplasty
10.3760/cma.j.cn115330-20240324-00168
- VernacularTitle:鼻整形术后嗅觉障碍原因的初步探讨
- Author:
Jia LIU
1
;
Xiaojun ZHAN
;
Linyin YAO
;
Xing GAO
;
Chunhua HU
;
Wen HU
;
Jianfeng LIU
Author Information
1. 首都儿科研究所附属儿童医院耳鼻咽喉头颈外科，北京 100020
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Olfaction disorders;
Aesthetic rhinoplasty;
Olfactory event-related potentials;
Acoustic rhinometry;
Etiology
- From:
Chinese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery
2025;60(2):127-133
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:This study aims to evaluate the nasal structural and electrophysiological features of patients with postoperative olfactory dysfunction following aesthetic rhinoplasty.Methods:We retrospectively analyzed the clinical features of 30 outpatients (females, aged 33±6 years) from Beijing Anzhen Hospital and China-Japan Friendship Hospital between 2014 and 2023, who complained of olfactory dysfunction following aesthetic rhinoplasty. The control group was 30 healthy females aged 32±9 years. Psychophysical olfactory test (Sniffin′ Sticks, SS), olfactory and trigeminal event-related potentials (oERPs and tERPs), and acoustic rhinometry were used for evaluating the olfactory function and nasal structure in patients and healthy controls. SPSS 17.0 software was used to compare the difference in olfactory function and nasal structure between the two groups and to analyze the factors related postoperative olfactory dysfunction.Results:There was a significant difference in the scores on psychophysical olfactory test between the patients and controls (10.78±3.90 vs. 33.66±2.42, t=-23.35, P<0.001). ERPs could be evoked in all patients and controls. Patients showed higher amplitudes of N 1 waves in both oERPs and tERPs than controls ( P<0.05 for all), but no differences in the latencies of N 1 and P 2 waves or in the amplitudes of P 2 waves were observed between the two groups ( P>0.05 for all). There was no difference in nasal structure between the two groups ( P>0.05). However, after nasal decongestant, mucosal congestion in the cross-sectional area (CSA) from the nostril to 6 cm level was found more significantly in patients than controls (nasal congestion index 40.00% vs. 1.00%, t=2.09, P=0.047). Better olfactory function was associated with increasing nasal volumes, increasing nasal threshold and anterior nasal turbinate plane CSA( P<0.05 for all). Conclusion:The important factor related to olfactory dysfunction following aesthetic rhinoplasty may be attributed to local mucosal congestion, rather than nasal structural alteration or neurophysiologic deficits in the olfactory pathway.
