Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_4534_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Contents
- •1.1.9 Laryngeal Atresia
- •1.1.10 Laryngeal Webs
- •1.1.11 Congenital Subglottic Stenosis
- •1.1.12 Laryngeal Cleft
- •1.1.13 Tracheoesophageal Fistula
- •1.1.14 Tracheal Bronchus
- •1.2.2 Mesenchyme Development
- •1.2.4 Lung Development
- •1.2.4.1 Embryonic Stage
- •1.2.4.2 Pseudoglandular Stage
- •1.1.1 Oral Cavity
- •1.1.2 Nasal Cavity
- •1.1.3 Palate
- •1.1.4 Primitive Pharynx
- •1.1.5 Upper Airway Anomalies
- •1.1.6 Cleft Lip/Palate
- •1.1.7 Choanal Atresia
- •1.1.8 Laryngomalacia
- •1.2.4.3 Canalicular Stage
- •1.2.4.4 Saccular Stage
- •1.2.4.5 Alveolar Stage
- •1.2.5 Congenital Respiratory System Defects
- •1.2.5.1 Tracheal Agenesis
- •1.2.5.2 Congenital Tracheal Stenosis
- •1.2.5.3 Lung Agenesis
- •1.2.5.4 Lung Hypoplasia
- •References
- •2.1 Introduction
- •2.2 Nasal Cavity
- •2.2.1 Vestibule
- •2.2.2 Respiratory Mucosa
- •2.2.3 Olfactory Mucosa
- •Supporting Cells
- •Basal Cell
- •Olfactory Receptor Cell (Bipolar Neuron)
- •Brush Cell (Microvillar Cell)
- •2.2.3.2 The Lamina Propria
- •2.2.3.3 Olfactory Glands (Bowman’s Glands)
- •2.3 Paranasal Sinuses
- •2.4 Pharynx
- •2.5 Larynx
- •2.6 Trachea
- •2.6.1.1 Ciliated Columnar Cells
- •2.6.1.2 Goblet Cells
- •2.6.1.3 Brush Cells
- •2.6.1.4 Basal Cells
- •2.6.1.5 Enteroendocrine System Cells (Kulchitsky Cells or DNES Cells)
- •2.6.2 Lamina Propria
- •2.7 Lungs
- •2.7.1 Pleura
- •2.7.2 Bronchi
- •2.7.3 Bronchioles
- •2.7.3.1 Terminal Bronchioles
- •2.7.3.2 Respiratory Bronchioles
- •2.7.4 Ductus Alveolaris
- •2.7.5 Alveoli
- •2.7.5.2 Type II Alveolar Cell (Septal Cell, Large Alveolar Cell)
- •References
- •3.1.1.3 Nerves
- •Ophthalmic Division
- •Maxillary Division
- •Parasympathetic Nerve Supply
- •3.1.1.4 Bony Anatomy
- •3.1.1.5 Cartilaginous Pyramid
- •3.1.1.6 Structure
- •External Nasal Anatomy
- •Internal Nasal Anatomy
- •3.1.2 Nasal Physiology
- •3.1.2.1 Nasal Airflow
- •3.1.2.2 Abnormal Nasal Physiology
- •3.2.1 Larynx Anatomy
- •Cricoid Cartilage
- •Thyroid Cartilage
- •Epiglottis
- •Arytenoid Cartilages
- •Corniculate Cartilages
- •Cuneiform Cartilages
- •Extrinsic Ligaments
- •Intrinsic Ligaments
- •Laryngeal Cavity
- •Piriform Recesses
- •Cricothyroid Muscles
- •Posterior Cricoarytenoid Muscles
- •Lateral Cricoarytenoid Muscles
- •Transverse Arytenoid Muscle
- •Thyroarytenoid Muscles
- •Superior Laryngeal Nerve
- •Arteries
- •Veins
- •Lymphatics
- •Swallowing
- •Respiration
- •Phonation
- •3.2.2.1 Reflex Glottic Closure
- •References
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2.1 Choanal Atresia
- •4.2.2 Pyriform Aperture Stenosis
- •4.2.3 Cleft Lip Nasal Deformity
- •4.2.4 Nasolacrimal Duct Cysts
- •4.2.5 Encephaloceles
- •4.3 Craniofacial Anomalies
- •4.3.1 Pierre Robin Syndrome
- •4.3.2 Treacher-Collins Syndrome
- •4.3.3 Crouzon Syndrome
- •4.3.4 Down Syndrome
- •4.3.5 Apert Syndrome
- •4.4.1 Thyroglossal Duct Cyst
- •4.4.2 Laryngomalacia
- •4.4.3 Vocal Fold Paralysis
- •4.4.5 Subglottic Stenosis
- •4.4.6 Subglottic Hemangioma
- •4.4.7 Laryngeal Cysts
- •4.4.8 Laryngeal Cleft
- •4.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •5.1 Innate Immunity
- •5.2 Adaptive Immunity
- •References
- •6.1 Introduction
- •6.2 Innate Immunity
- •6.3 Adaptive Immunity
- •References
- •7.1 Introduction
- •References
- •8: Respiratory Microbiome
- •8.1 Introduction
- •8.2.1 Childhood Asthma
- •8.2.2 Asthma Exacerbation
- •8.3 Bacteriome
- •8.4 Virome
- •8.5 Mycobiome
- •References
- •9.1 Introduction
- •References
- •10.1 Introduction
- •10.3.3 The Appointment Process, Explained
- •10.3.5 Parental Involvement
- •10.4 Coordinating Care When Your Child Is Ill
- •10.4.3 Exhibit Cohesion
- •10.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •11.1 Introduction
- •11.2 Nasal Cavity
- •11.2.1 Choanal Atresia
- •11.2.2 Rhinosinusitis
- •11.2.4 Juvenile Nasopharyngeal Angiofibroma
- •11.3 Pharynx
- •11.4 Nasopharynx
- •11.4.1 Adenoid Hypertrophy
- •11.4.2 Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
- •11.5 Oropharynx
- •11.5.1 Thyroglossal Duct Cyst
- •11.6 Hypopharynx
- •11.6.1 Retropharyngeal Abscess
- •11.6.2 Lymphatic Malformation
- •11.6.4 Lymphoma
- •11.6.5 Rhabdomyosarcoma
- •11.7 Larynx
- •11.7.1 Subglottic Stenosis
- •11.7.2 Laryngotracheal Papillomatozis
- •11.7.3 Croup
- •11.7.4 Epiglottitis
- •11.7.5 Foreign Body Aspiration
- •References
- •12.2.1 Plain Radiography
- •12.2.1.1 The Thymus
- •Tracheal Buckling
- •Hilum
- •Diaphragm
- •Mediastinal Borders
- •Lung Opacities
- •Cystic Lung Diseases
- •Pulmonary İnterstitial Emphysema (PIE)
- •Unilateral Hyperlucent Lung
- •12.2.2 Fluoroscopy
- •12.2.3 Ultrasound
- •12.2.4 Computed Tomography
- •12.2.5 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)
- •12.2.6 Angiography
- •12.2.7 Positron Emission Tomography (PET)
- •12.3 Conclusion
- •References
- •13.1 Introduction
- •13.2 Nasal Diagnostic Procedures
- •13.2.1 Indications
- •13.2.2 Contraindications
- •13.2.3 Anatomical Features
- •13.2.4 Technical Considerations
- •13.2.5 Technique
- •13.2.5.1 First Pass
- •13.2.5.2 Second Pass
- •13.2.5.3 Third Pass
- •13.3 Flexible Laryngoscopy
- •13.4 Direct Laryngoscopy
- •13.5 Video Laryngoscopy
- •13.5.1 Indications
- •13.5.2 Contraindications
- •13.5.3 Outcomes
- •13.5.4 Equipment
- •13.5.5 Approach Considerations
- •References
- •14.1 Upper Airways
- •14.2.3 Laryngeal Pathologıes
- •References
- •15.1 Introduction
- •15.2 Airway Measurements
- •References
- •16.1 Introduction
- •16.2 Background
- •References
- •17: Allergen Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
- •17.1 Introduction
- •17.2 Tests
- •17.2.1 Skin Tests
- •17.2.3 Component Resolved Diagnosis (CRD)
- •17.2.4 Tryptase
- •17.2.5 Basophil Activation Test (BAT)
- •17.2.6 Provocation Tests
- •17.2.7 Nasal sIgE
- •17.2.8 Nasal Smear Eosinophilia
- •17.2.9 Eosinophilic Cationic Protein (ECP)
- •References
- •18: Smell Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
- •18.1 Introduction
- •18.2 Possible Olfactory Disorder Diagnosis
- •18.2.1 Conductive Defects
- •18.2.3 Inherited Disorders
- •18.2.3.1 Hormonal Disturbances
- •18.4 Odor Threshold Tests
- •18.8.1 Butanol Threshold Test
- •18.8.1.1 The Penn State University Odor Identification Exam
- •18.8.2 Cross-Cultural Smell Identification Test
- •18.8.3 Sniffin’ Sticks
- •References
- •19: Taste Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
- •19.1 Introduction
- •19.2 Definitions
- •19.2.1 Taste Dysfunction Abnormalities
- •19.4.1 Taste Dysfunction
- •19.4.2 COVID-19
- •19.5 Taste Disorder Diagnosis
- •19.6.2 Magnitude Matching
- •19.6.3 Spatial Test
- •References
- •20.1 Introduction
- •20.2 Primary Otalgia Causes
- •20.2.1 Auricle
- •20.2.1.1 Infections
- •20.2.1.2 Trauma
- •20.2.1.3 Allergic Angioedema
- •20.2.1.4 Thermal Damage
- •20.2.2 External Auditory Canal
- •20.2.2.1 Otitis Externa
- •20.2.2.2 Malignant Otitis Externa
- •20.2.2.3 Eczematous Dermatitis
- •20.2.2.4 Furunculosis
- •20.2.2.5 Foreign Body
- •20.2.2.6 Cerumen Impaction
- •20.2.2.7 Tumors
- •20.2.3 Middle Ear
- •20.2.3.1 Acute Otitis Media
- •20.2.3.3 Eustachian Tube Dysfunction
- •20.2.3.4 Cholesteatoma
- •20.2.3.5 Trauma
- •20.3 Secondary Otalgia Causes
- •20.3.1 Oropharyngeal Infections
- •20.3.2 Dental Causes
- •20.3.3 Auricular Lymphadenitis
- •20.3.4 Neck Abscess
- •20.3.5 Parotitis
- •20.3.6 Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction
- •20.3.7 Sinusitis
- •20.4 Differential Diagnosis
- •References
- •21.1 Introduction
- •21.2 Bacterial Otitis Externa
- •21.3 Acute Otitis Media
- •21.4 Chronic Suppurative Otitis Media
- •21.5 Foreign Body
- •21.5.1 Cerumen
- •21.5.2 Tympanostomy Tube Drainage
- •21.5.3 Traumatic Cerebrospinal Fluid Otorrhea
- •21.5.5 Necrotizing Otitis Externa (Malignant External Otitis)
- •21.5.6 Neoplasms
- •21.5.7 Polyps
- •21.5.8 Otomycosis
- •21.5.9 First Branchial Cleft Cysts
- •21.5.10 Cholesteatoma
- •21.5.11 Spontaneous Cerebral Spinal Fluid Otorrhea
- •References
- •22.1 Introduction
- •22.4 Congenital Causes
- •22.4.1 Choanal Atresia
- •22.4.2 Pyriform Apertura Stenosis
- •22.4.3 Nasal Midline Congenital Masses
- •22.4.3.1 Nasal Dermoid Cyst
- •22.4.3.2 Nasal Glioma
- •22.4.3.3 Encephalocele (Encephalo-Meningocele)
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •22.4.3.4 Nasolacrimal Duct Cyst (Dacryocystocele)
- •22.5 Infectious Causes
- •22.5.1.1 Rhinitis Etiology
- •22.5.2 Neonatal Rhinitis
- •22.5.3 Bacterial or Viral Rhinitis
- •22.5.4 Iatrogenic Rhinitis
- •22.5.5 Infectious Rhinitis (Rhinosinusitis)
- •22.6 Adenoid Hypertrophy
- •22.7 Inflammatory Causes
- •22.7.1 Allergic Rhinitis
- •22.7.2 Nonallergic Rhinitis
- •22.7.3 Eosinophilic Nonallergic Rhinitis (NARES)
- •22.7.4 Nasal Polyp
- •22.7.5 Antrochoanal Polyp
- •22.7.6 Inferior Turbinate Hypertrophy
- •22.8 Neoplasia
- •22.8.1 Benign Tumors (Juvenile Nasopharyngeal Angiofibroma)
- •22.8.2 Malignant Tumors
- •22.9 Systemic Causes
- •22.9.1 Cystic Fibrosis
- •22.9.2 Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia
- •22.10 Trauma/Iatrogenic Causes
- •22.10.1 Nasal Trauma-Septal Hematoma
- •22.10.2 Septum Deviation
- •22.10.3 Nasal Foreign Bodies
- •References
- •23.1 Introduction
- •23.2 Pathophysiology
- •23.3 Allergic Rhinitis
- •23.4 Non-allergic Rhinitis
- •23.5 Infectious Rhinitis
- •23.6.1 Vasomotor Rhinitis
- •23.7 Evaluation
- •23.8 Diagnosis
- •23.9 Treatment
- •23.10 Prognosis
- •23.11 Conclusion
- •References
- •24.1 Introduction
- •24.2 Pathogenesis
- •24.3 Diagnosis
- •24.3.1 History
- •24.3.2 Examination
- •24.4 Differential Diagnoses
- •24.5 CSF Rhinorrhea
- •24.5.1 CSF Physiology
- •24.5.1.1 Pathogenesis
- •24.6 Diagnosis
- •24.6.1 Chemical Diagnosis
- •24.6.2 Imaging Diagnosis
- •24.7 Treatment
- •24.7.1 Surgical Technique
- •References
- •25.1 Introduction
- •25.1.1 Waldeyer Ring
- •25.3 Anatomy
- •25.3.1 Lymphatic Drainage
- •25.3.1.1 Nerve Supply
- •25.6 Tonsillary Hypertrophy
- •25.7 Physical Examination
- •25.8.1 Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- •References
- •26.1 Introduction
- •26.5 Halitosis Physiopathology
- •26.6.1 Oral Halitosis (Intraoral Halitosis, Oral Malodor)
- •26.6.1.1 Periodontal Infections
- •26.6.1.2 Tongue Oriented Halitosis
- •26.6.1.3 Peritonsillar Abscess
- •26.7 Paranasal Sinus Diseases
- •26.8 Adenoid Vegetation
- •26.9 Chronic Pharyngitis
- •26.10 Chronic Tonsillitis
- •26.11 Tonsillolith
- •26.12 Non-Oral Halitosis
- •26.13 Gastroesophageal Reflux
- •26.14 Diagnosis
- •26.14.1 Organoleptic Measurement
- •26.14.2 Sulfur Monitoring
- •26.14.2.1 Indirect Methods
- •26.14.2.3 Ammonia Monitoring
- •26.14.2.4 Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)
- •26.15 Physical Examination
- •References
- •27.1 Introduction
- •27.2 Epidemiology
- •27.4 Diagnosis
- •27.5.1 Clinical Assessment
- •27.6 Treatment
- •27.6.1 Voice Therapy
- •27.7 Phonosurgery
- •References
- •28.1 Introduction
- •28.2 Epidemiologic Characteristics
- •28.3 Swallowing Physiologic Phases
- •28.3.1.1 Prematurity
- •28.3.1.2 Neuromuscular
- •28.3.1.5 Cardiopulmonary Disease
- •28.4 Symptoms
- •28.5 Clinical Feeding Assessment
- •28.7 Flexible Endoscopic Swallowing Evaluation
- •28.8 Imaging
- •28.9 Endoscopic Assessments
- •28.9.1 High-Resolution Manometry
- •28.10 Medical Management
- •28.11 Surgical Management
- •28.11.1 Ankyloglossia
- •28.11.2 Laryngomalacia
- •28.11.3 Laryngeal Cleft
- •28.12 Conclusions
- •References
- •29.1 Introduction
- •29.2 Reactive Lymph Node Enlargements
- •29.3 Vaccines
- •29.4 Acute Suppurative Lymphadenitis
- •29.6 Granulomatous Lymphadenitis
- •29.6.1 Mycobacterial Infection
- •29.6.2 BCG Vaccine
- •29.6.3 Cat-Scratch Disease
- •29.6.4 Sarcoidosis
- •29.6.5 Kikuchi-Fujimoto Disease
- •29.7 Malignancies
- •29.8 Diagnosis
- •References
- •30.1 Introduction
- •30.2 Upper Airway Cough Syndrome
- •30.3 Chronic Rhinosinusitis
- •30.5 Otogenic Cough
- •30.6 Laryngeal Clefts
- •30.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •31.1 Introduction
- •31.5.1 Vocal Cord Disfunction (VCD)
- •31.5.2 Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS)
- •31.5.3 Allergic or Non-Allergic Rhinitis
- •31.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •32.1 Introduction
- •32.2.1 Non-massive Hemoptysis
- •32.2.2 Massive Hemoptysis
- •32.4 Diagnostic Evaluation
- •32.4.1 History
- •32.4.1.1 Infection Warning Signs
- •32.4.1.2 Choking
- •32.4.1.3 Exposures
- •32.4.1.4 Underlying Medical Problems
- •32.4.2 Physical Examination
- •32.4.3 Laboratory Evaluation
- •32.4.4 Imaging
- •32.5.1 Respiratory Illness
- •32.5.3 Trauma
- •32.5.4 Hemoptysis Mimics
- •References
- •33.1 Introduction
- •33.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •34: Pediatric Allergic Rhinitis: Otolaryngology Perspective
- •34.1 Introduction
- •34.2 Epidemiology
- •34.2.1 Prevalence
- •34.2.2 Risk factors
- •34.3.1 Classical Pathway
- •34.3.2 Nasal Pathway
- •34.4.2 Physical Examination
- •34.4.3 Diagnostic Tests
- •34.4.4 Nasal Cytology
- •34.4.5 Imaging
- •34.5.1 Adenoid Hypertrophy
- •34.5.2 Nasal Septal Deviation
- •34.5.3 Chronic Rhinosinusitis
- •34.5.4 Turbinate Hypertrophy
- •34.5.5 Nasal Foreign Body
- •34.5.6 Other Clinical Conditions
- •34.6.1 Saline Irrigation (Douching)
- •34.7 Treatment
- •34.7.1 Oral Antihistamines
- •34.7.2 Intranasal Steroids
- •34.7.3 Leukotriene Inhibitors
- •34.7.5 Oral Steroids
- •34.7.6 Intranasal Antihistamines
- •34.7.7 Immunotherapy (Sublingual-Subcutaneous)
- •34.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •35: Allergic Rhinitis: Pediatric Pulmonologist Perspective
- •35.1 Introduction
- •35.2.1 Epidemiological Relationship
- •35.2.4 Immunopathology
- •35.2.7 Non-pharmaceutical Treatment Method
- •35.2.8 Pharmaceutical Medication Policy
- •35.2.9 Immunotherapy Against Allergens
- •35.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •References
- •37.1 Introduction
- •37.2 Adenoid Hypertrophy
- •37.7 Preoperative Evaluation
- •37.8 Contraindications
- •37.9 Complications
- •37.9.1 Bleeding
- •37.9.2 Hypernasality
- •37.9.3 Surgical Traumas
- •37.9.4 Torticollis
- •37.9.5 Otitis Media
- •37.9.6 Psychological Trauma
- •37.9.7 Nasopharyngeal Stenosis
- •37.9.8 Recurrence
- •37.10 Postoperative Care
- •37.11 Surgery
- •37.12.1 Adenoiditis
- •References
- •38.1 Introduction
- •38.2 Anatomy
- •38.2.1 Palatine Tonsils (Faucial Tonsils)
- •38.2.2 Lingual Tonsil
- •38.2.3 Adenoids (Pharyngeal Tonsil)
- •38.2.4 Tubal Tonsils
- •38.5.1 Viral Tonsillitis
- •38.5.2 Bacterial Tonsillitis
- •38.5.3 Candida
- •38.6.1 Suppurative Complications
- •38.6.1.1 Peritonsillar Abscess (Quincy Tonsil)
- •Lemierre’s Syndrome
- •38.6.2 Nonsuppurative Complications
- •38.6.2.1 Acute Rheumatic Fever
- •38.6.2.2 Poststreptococcal Glomerulonephritis
- •38.6.2.3 Scarlet Fever
- •38.6.2.6 Palmoplantar Pustulosis (PPP)
- •38.6.2.7 IgA Nephropathy
- •38.7 Clinical Manifestation
- •38.7.1 Infection
- •38.7.2 Obstruction
- •38.7.3 Neoplasia
- •38.8 Diagnosis
- •38.8.2 Physical Examination
- •38.8.3 Laboratory
- •38.8.4 Imagining
- •38.8.5 Polysomnography
- •38.9 Treatments
- •38.9.1 Medical Treatment
- •38.9.2 Surgery
- •38.9.2.2 Tonsillectomy
- •38.9.3.1 Intraoperative Complications
- •38.9.3.4 Postoperative Long-Term Complications (>weeks)

17 Allergen Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
Table 17.5 Recommendations for evaluating NAC as positive [55] (taken from EAACI Position
paper on the standardization of nasal allergen challenges)
Method
Subjective measures
Visual analog scale (VAS)
Lebel score
Linder score
Total symptom nasal score
(TNSS)
Objective measures
Peak nasal inspiratory ow
(PNIF)
Acoustic rhinometry
(AcRh)
Active anterior
rhinomanometry (AAR)
4-phase-rhinomanometry
(4PR)
Clearly positive
Symptoms ≥55mm Symptoms ≥23mm
Increase of ≥5 points Increase of ≥3 points
Increase of ≥5 points Increase of ≥3 points
Increase of ≥5 points Increase of ≥3 points
Flow decrease of ≥40% Flow decrease of ≥20%
CSA-2 decrease of ≥40%
Flow decrease of ≥40% at
150Pa
≥40% increase in logarithmic(lg)
effective resistance
Moderately positive
Decrease in sum of
2–6cm3≥27% bilaterally
Flow decrease in ≥20% at
150Pa
≥20% increase in lg effective
resistance
229
penetration into the lower respiratory tract via the nasopharynx. NAC response is
assessed with subjective evaluation through symptom ratings and an objective evaluation of nasal patency which is using the peak nasal inspiratory ow (PNIF), an
acoustic rhinometer, an anterior rhinomanometry, or a 4-phase rhinomanometry.
The increase of ≥30% for Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) or visual analog
scale (VAS) is frequently accepted as positive in subjective assessments. Objective
NAC results are dened as positive when ≥40% decrease of ow is detected [55].
Evaluations of the NAC results are shown in Table17.5 [55]. Although it has never
been documented, a nasal allergen challenge can cause an anaphylactic reaction.
Allergen Exposure Chambers (AECs) are provocation tests with stable and
reproducible priorities under standardized environmental circumstances. At 1987,
Vienna Challenge Chamber was the rst dened and Der P-1 and Grass antigens
were used. In addition to Der P-1 and Grass antigens Ragweed and Japanese cedar
pollen antigens were utilized with different devices over time. AECs offer the
unique advantage of simulating real-world allergen exposures, testing the response
of the entire patient rather than focusing solely on a specic target organ. This comprehensive approach includes exposure to both the upper and lower airways, along
with the conjunctival mucosa. A correlation between the symptoms during AEC and
at natural seasonal exposure was shown in a study [56]. FDA (Food and Drug
Administration) underscores that AECs may be used in clinical assessment of allergic rhinitis however EMA (European Medicines Agency) determined the necessity
of validation [57, 58].
Bronchial Provocation Tests (BPT): Abnormal bronchoconstrictor response
of the airways due to specic or nonspecic stimuli is considered to be a characteristic pathophysiological feature of asthma. Detecting airway inammation and airway hyperresponsiveness is important of asthma diagnose. BPT can provide
signicant information that could not be detected by noninvasive indicators of

230
C. Özdemiral and Ü. M. Şahiner
airway inammation. BPT becomes particularly important when other diagnostic
measures, such as spirometry or assessing bronchodilator response, yield inconclusive results. It’s especially useful in identifying triggers related to exposure to environmental or occupational allergens. Moreover, BPT may play a signicant role in
assessing the efcacy of current asthma therapy. To evaluate airway responsiveness
in patients BPT could be performed directly or indirectly methods. Direct BPT
involves substances like methacholine or histamine that directly act on specic
receptors on the bronchial smooth muscle cells. When these substances come into
contact with these receptors, they trigger the contraction of the smooth muscles,
leading to airway narrowing. Methacholine is a synthetic derivative of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Since histamine is linked to greater systemic adverse
effects, such as headache, ushing, and hoarseness, methacholine is more frequently utilized. Indirect BPT, on the other hand, involves substances or stimuli
like hypertonic saline, mannitol, adenosine monophosphate, cold air, or exercise.
These agents trigger the release of various mediators within the airways, causing
inammation and, subsequently, airway constriction. Indirect methods are benecial in assessing the overall response of the airways, involving not just smooth
muscle cells but also various mediators, receptors, and cells within the airway
walls. Thus, indirect BPT is considered to be more specic for asthma. Methacholine
is available as dry crystalline powder (Provocoline®) has 100mg vial. Methacholine
solution is prepared with normal saline (0.9% sodium chloride) as the diluent of
choice. The ve-breath method and a dosage regimen employing methacholine
concentrations of 0.0625, 0.25, 1, 4 and 16mg/mL have been recommended by the
American Thoracic Society [59]. Baseline spirometry is performed (FEV1 (forced
expiratory ow in 1s) >70%) then 2mL of the rst diluted solution is given with
nebulizer which has a dosimeter to patient. The patient inhales ve time from the
nebulizer. The FEV1 at about 30 and 90s after the fth inhalation is measured. If
the FEV1 decline is less than 20%, challenge test is continued subsequent concentration. If the FEV1 falls more than 20% from baseline or the highest concentration
has been given methacholine challenge test is nished and considered to be positive. If the FEV1 does not decrease by at least 20% after the maximum dose (i.e.,
16 mg/mL), the PC20 (provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1)
should be documented as “>16mg/mL”. If PC20 is greater than 16mg/mL, it is
highly probable that the patient does not currently have asthma. However methacholine challenge testing has a higher negative predictive power than positive predictive power, it is more benecial in eliminating an asthma diagnosis than in
establishing one [59, 60].
In patients with asthma who have a history of experiencing dyspnea during or
after exertion, exercise challenge test can be used to diagnose exercise induced
bronchoconstriction. The motor-driven treadmill with adjustable speed and grade
or the electromagnetically braked cycle ergometer are the preferred forms of exercise to challenge test. The exercise duration is typically 6min for children under
the age of 12 and 8min for older children and adults. Both speed and grade begin

17 Allergen Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
at a low level and increase in difculty until the heart rate (estimated as 220-age
in years) reaches 80–90% of the predicted maximum. Exercise intensity may be
measured by measuring ventilation rather than heart rate. Ventilation should reach
40–60% of the predicted maximum voluntary ventilation (estimated as FEV1x35).
When the patient has exercised for at least 4min at the target heart rate or breathing, the test is completed. Patients can terminate the test any time. Spirometry is
used before and after exercise. After nishing exertion, spirometry should be performed 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30min later. 10% of a decline is regarded as abnormal
however more than 15% decline as more diagnostic for exercise induced bronchoconstriction [59].
231
17.2.7 Nasal sIgE
Nasal sIgE measurement has high specicity however low sensitivity for diagnosis
of local allergic rhinitis. However the sensitivity, specicity, positive predictive
value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy for local sIgE as a diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of local allergic rhinitis is founded in a small patient
group 91%, 78%, 98%, 94%, respectively [61]. Although several samples (secretions, scraping, brushing, tissue homogenates, etc.) have been used to assess nasal
sIgE, none of them have been validated [62].
17.2.8 Nasal Smear Eosinophilia
Eosinophils are recruited from blood to nasal mucosa due to Type 2 immunity
and cytokines. More than 10% eosinophils are detected at nasal smear is frequently accepted as nasal eosinophilia. Nasal eosinophilia may seen in patients
with AR, Nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome, and Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis. A correlation is known between AR symptoms and
nasal smear eosinophil counts [63].
17.2.9 Eosinophilic Cationic Protein (ECP)
The levels of the ECP in tissue and peripheral blood strongly linked with the amount
of eosinophils. ECP may increase in allergic diseases including asthma, allergic
rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis, also infections, and Hypereosinophilic syndrome.
Elevated ECP may be detected at serum, sputum, nasal lavage, bronchoalveolar
uid, and skin. ECP and airway inammation have a favorable correlation, but not
with airway hyperresponsiveness. Nevertheless, it has been demonstrated to be useful in determining the severity of asthma, compliance with anti-inammatory
asthma therapy, and as a guide for reducing inhaled corticosteroid dosage [64].

232
C. Özdemiral and Ü. M. Şahiner
17.3 Future Perspectives andConclusion
The rising prevalence of allergies worldwide has indeed necessitated the development of more precise and specic diagnostic tests. In addition to the tests that have
been performed safely and results are reliable for decades to diagnose or rule out
allergy, there is still need for tests provide more specic and precise results. There
is lack of evaluation and validation for sIgE cut off thresholds for inhalant allergens
to predict clinical reactivity. RD promises hope to clinicians and patients for unresolved allergic circumstances and ndings can signicantly contribute to individualized approach to the patient, however time consuming and interpretation the
results depends on specic training are among difculties. Increased validation and
standardization of the laboratories for BAT may reduce the necessity for invivo
procedures such intradermal testing and allergen challenges. Affording required
standardized conditions make using AEC difcult, however it may provide results
similar to the exposure in real life due to provoke with whole body.
In summary, while advancements in allergy testing offer promising prospects for
more accurate diagnoses and personalized treatment approaches, challenges like
standardization, interpretation, and practical application hinder their widespread
adoption and effectiveness. Nonetheless, ongoing research and improvements aim
to address these limitations for better management of allergic conditions in
the future.
References
1. Dreborg S, Frew A. Position paper: allergen standardization and skin tests. Allergy.
1993;48(s14):49–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.1993.tb04756.x.
2. Blackley CH.Experimental researches on the causes and nature of Catarrhus aestivus (Hay
fever or Hay-asthma), vol. 133. London, England: Balliere Tindall Cox; 1873. p. 181.
3. Indrajana T, Spieksma FTM, Voorhorst R.Comparative study of the intracutaneous, scratch
and prick tests in allergy. Ann Allergy. 1997;29:639–50.
4. Ebruster H.The prick test, a recent cutaneous test for the diagnosis of allergic disorders. Wien
Klin Wochenschr. 1959;71:551–4.
5. Pepys J.Skin testing. Br J Hosp Med. 1975;14:412–7.
6. Demoly P, Michel F, Bousquet J.In vivo methods for study of allergy. Skin tests, techniques
and interpretation. In: Middleton E, Reed C, Ellis E, Adkinson N, Yunginger J, Busse W, editors. Allergy, principles and practice. 5th ed. Mosby Co: St Louis, MO; 1998. p. 530–9.
7. Heinzerling L, Mari A, Bergmann KC, et al. The skin prick test—European standards. Clin
Transl Allergy. 2013;3:3. https://doi.org/10.1186/2045-7022-3-3.
8. Heinzerling LM, Burbach GJ, Edenharter G, et al. GA2LEN skin test study I: GA2LEN har-
monization of skin prick testing: novel sensitization patterns for inhalant allergens in Europe.
Allergy. 2009;64(10):1498–506. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.02093.x.
9. Popov TA, Passalacqua G, González-Díaz SN, et al. Medical devices in allergy practice.
World Allergy Organ J. 2020;13(10):100466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.waojou.2020.100466.
10. Şahiner UM, Civelek E, Yavuz ST, Büyüktiryaki AB, Tuncer A, Şekerel BE.Skin prick testing
to aeroallergen extracts: what is the optimal panel in children and adolescents in Turkey? Int
Arch Allergy Immunol. 2012;157(4):391–8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000329870.

17 Allergen Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
11. Newson RB, van Ree R, Forsberg B, et al. Geographical variation in the prevalence of sensiti-
zation to common aeroallergens in adults: the GA2LEN survey. Allergy. 2014;69(5):643–51.
https://doi.org/10.1111/all.12397.
12. Bernstein IL, Li JT, Bernstein DI, et al. Allergy diagnostic testing: an updated practice param-
eter. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2008;100(3 Suppl 3):S1–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/
s1081-1206(10)60305-5.
13. Buyuktiryaki B, Sahiner UM, Karabulut E, Cavkaytar O, Tuncer A, Sekerel BE.Optimizing
the use of a skin prick test device on children. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2013;162(1):65–70.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000350788.
14. Skin tests used in type I allergy testing position paper. Sub-committee on skin tests of the
European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology. Allergy. 1989;44(s10):11–59.
15. Oppenheimer J, Nelson HS. Skin testing. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2006;96(2 Suppl
1):S6–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1081-1206(10)60895-2.
16. Bousquet PJ, Chatzi L, Jarvis D, Burney P.Original article: assessing skin prick tests reliability
in ECRHS-I.Allergy. 2008;63(3):341–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01581.x.
17. Nevis IF, Binkley K, Kabali C.Diagnostic accuracy of skin-prick testing for allergic rhinitis:
a systematic review and meta-analysis. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol. 2016;12(1):20. https://
doi.org/10.1186/s13223-016-0126-0.
18. Bousquet J, Heinzerling L, Bachert C, et al. Practical guide to skin prick tests in allergy to
aeroallergens. Allergy. 2012;67(1):18–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2011.02728.x.
19. Rondón C, Romero JJ, López S, et al. Local IgE production and positive nasal provocation test
in patients with persistent nonallergic rhinitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007;119(4):899–905.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2007.01.006.
20. Leonardi A, Fregona IA, Gismondi M, Daniotti E, Carniel G, Secchi AG.Correlation between
conjunctival provocation test (CPT) and systemic allergometric tests in allergic conjunctivitis.
Eye (Lond). 1990;4(Pt 5):760–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.1990.109.
21. Chiriac AM, Bousquet J, Demoly P. 70—In vivo methods for the study and diagnosis of
allergy. In: Adkinson NF, Bochner BS, Burks AW, et al., editors. Middleton’s allergy. 8th ed.
W.B.Saunders; 2014. p. 1119–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-08593-9.00071-1.
22. Wise SK, Lin SY, Toskala E, et al. International consensus statement on allergy and rhinol-
ogy: allergic rhinitis. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2018;8(2):108–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/
alr.22073.
23. Cox L, Williams B, Sicherer S, et al. Pearls and pitfalls of allergy diagnostic testing: report
from the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American Academy of
allergy, asthma and immunology specic IgE test task force. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol.
2008;101(6):580–92.
24. Gendo K, Larson EB. Evidence-based diagnostic strategies for evaluat-
ing suspected allergic rhinitis. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(4):278–89. https://doi.
org/10.7326/0003-4819-140-4-200402170-00010.
25. Schwindt CD, Hutcheson PS, Leu SY, Dykewicz MS.Role of intradermal skin tests in the
evaluation of clinically relevant respiratory allergy assessed using patient history and nasal
challenges. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2005;94(6):627–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S1081-1206(10)61319-1.
26. Lockey R, Benedict L, Turkeltaub P, Bukantz S. Fatalities from immunotherapy (IT) and
skin testing (ST). J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1987;79(4):660–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0091-6749(87)80164-1.
27. Jadassohn J. Zur Kenntnis der medikamentoessen Dermatosen. In: Jarisch A, Neisser A,
editors. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft, V Kongress. Berlin:
Julius Springer; 1895. p. 103–29.
28. Fuiano N, Incorvaia C.Utility of the atopy patch test in the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis. Iran
J Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;28(86):169–75.
29. Lachapelle JM, Bruze M, Elsner PU, editors. Patch testing tips: recommendations from the
ICDRG.Springer; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45395-3.
233

234
30. Wilkinson DS, Fregert S, Magnusson B, et al. Terminology of contact dermatitis. Acta Derm
Venereol. 1970;50(4):287–92. https://doi.org/10.2340/0001555550287292.
31. Garg V, Brod B, Gaspari AA.Patch testing: uses, systems, risks/benets, and its role in man-
aging the patient with contact dermatitis. Clin Dermatol. 2021;39(4):580–90. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2021.03.005.
32. Kjellman NM, Johansson SG, Roth A. Serum IgE levels in healthy children quanti-
ed by a sandwich technique (PRIST). Clin Allergy. 1976;6(1):51–9. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1365-2222.1976.tb01411.x.
33. Emanuel IA.In vitro testing for allergy diagnosis. Otolaryngol Clin N Am. 2003;36(5):879–93.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0030-6665(03)00051-3.
34. Lee JH, Park KH, Kim HS, et al. Specic IgE measurement using AdvanSure® system: com-
parison of detection performance with ImmunoCAP® system in Korean allergy patients. Clin
Chim Acta. 2012;413(9–10):914–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2012.02.018.
35. Nolte H, DuBuske LM.Performance characteristics of a new automated enzyme immuno-
assay for the measurement of allergen-specic IgE.Summary of the probability outcomes
comparing results of allergen skin testing to results obtained with the HYTEC system and
CAP system. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1997;79(1):27–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S1081-1206(10)63080-3.
36. Bao Y, Chen J, Cheng L, et al. Chinese guideline on allergen immunotherapy for allergic
rhinitis. J Thorac Dis. 2017;9:4607–50. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2017.10.112.
37. Robinson M, Smart J. Allergy testing and referral in children. Aust Fam Physician.
2008;37:210–3.
38. de Vos G.Skin testing versus serum-specic IgE testing: which is better for diagnosing aeroal-
lergen sensitization and predicting clinical allergy? Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2014;14(5):430.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-014-0430-z.
39. Valenta L, Niederberger H, Kraft G. The recombinant allergen-based concept of com-
ponent-resolved diagnostics and immunotherapy (CRD and CRIT). Clin Exp Allergy.
1999;29(7):896–904. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2222.1999.00653.x.
40. Bousquet PJ, Castelli C, Daures JP, et al. Assessment of allergen sensitization in a general pop-
ulation-based survey (European Community Respiratory Health Survey I). Ann Epidemiol.
2010;20(11):797–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2010.05.012.
41. Matricardi PM, Kleine-Tebbe J, Hoffmann HJ, et al. EAACI molecular allergology user’s
guide. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2016;27(Suppl 23):1–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/
pai.12563.
42. Luengo O, Cardona V.Component resolved diagnosis: when should it be used? Clin Transl
Allergy. 2014;4:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/2045-7022-4-28.
43. Carlson G, Coop C.Pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS): a review of current available
literature. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2019;123(4):359–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
anai.2019.07.022.
44. Klemans RJB, Otte D, Knol M, et al. The diagnostic value of specic IgE to Ara h 2 to
predict peanut allergy in children is comparable to a validated and updated diagnostic prediction model. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;131(1):157–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jaci.2012.08.010.
45. Martín-Muñoz MF, Diaz-Perales A, Cannabal J, Quirce S.Anaphylaxis to hidden potato aller-
gens in a peach and egg allergic boy. Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol. 2017;49(1):45–8.
46. Heaps A, Carter S, Selwood C, et al. The utility of the ISAC allergen array in the investigation
of idiopathic anaphylaxis. Clin Exp Immunol. 2014;177(2):483–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/
cei.12334.
47. Sahiner UM, Yavuz ST, Buyuktiryaki B, et al. Serum basal tryptase levels in healthy chil-
dren: correlation between age and gender. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2014;35(5):404–8. https://
doi.org/10.2500/aap.2014.35.3769.
48. Michel M, Klingebiel C, Vitte J.Tryptase in type I hypersensitivity. Ann Allergy Asthma
Immunol. 2023;130(2):169–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2022.08.996.
49. Valent P, Bonadonna P, Hartmann K, et al. Why the 20% + 2 tryptase formula is a diagnostic
gold standard for severe systemic mast cell activation and mast cell activation syndrome. Int
Arch Allergy Immunol. 2019;180(1):44–51. https://doi.org/10.1159/000501079.
C. Özdemiral and Ü. M. Şahiner

17 Allergen Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
50. Santos AF, Douiri A, Bécares N, et al. Basophil activation test discriminates between allergy
and tolerance in peanut-sensitized children. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014;134(3):645–52.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2014.04.039.
51. Knol EF, Mul FP, Jansen H, Calafat J, Roos D.Monitoring human basophil activation via
CD63 monoclonal antibody 435. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1991;88(3 Pt 1):328–38. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0091-6749(91)90094-5.
52. Santos AF, Alpan O, Hoffmann HJ. Basophil activation test: mechanisms and consider-
ations for use in clinical trials and clinical practice. Allergy. 2021;76(8):2420–32. https://doi.
org/10.1111/all.14747.
53. Ansotegui IJ, Melioli G, Canonica GW, et al. IgE allergy diagnostics and other rel-
evant tests in allergy, a World Allergy Organization position paper. World Allergy Organ
J. 2020;13(2):100080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.waojou.2019.100080.
54. Dordal MT, Lluch-Bernal M, Sánchez MC, et al. Allergen-specic nasal provocation testing:
review by the rhinoconjunctivitis committee of the Spanish Society of Allergy and Clinical
Immunology. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol. 2011;21(1):1–12; quiz follow 12.
55. Augé J, Vent J, Agache I, et al. EAACI position paper on the standardization of nasal allergen
challenges. Allergy. 2018;73(8):1597–608. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.13416.
56. Jacobs RL, Harper N, He W, et al. Responses to ragweed pollen in a pollen challenge cham-
ber versus seasonal exposure identify allergic rhinoconjunctivitis endotypes. J Allergy Clin
Immunol. 2012;130(1):122–127.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2012.03.031.
57. Developing drug products for treatment guidance for industry. U.S. Food and Drug
Administration. 2020. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-
documents/allergic-rhinitis-developing-drug-products-treatment-guidance-industry.
Accessed 24 July 2023.
58. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Guideline on the clinical
development of products for specic immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic diseases.
November 2008
59. Crapo RO, Casaburi R, Coates AL, et al. Guidelines for methacholine and exercise challenge
testing-1999. This ofcial statement of the American Thoracic Society was adopted by the
ATS Board of Directors, July 1999. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;161(1):309–29. https://
doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.161.1.ats11-99.
60. Hallstrand TS, Leuppi JD, Joos G, et al. ERS technical standard on bronchial challenge
testing: pathophysiology and methodology of indirect airway challenge testing. Eur Respir
J. 2018;52(5):1801033. https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01033-2018.
61. Meng Y, Wang Y, Lou H, et al. Specic immunoglobulin E in nasal secretions for the diag-
nosis of local allergic rhinitis. Rhinology. 2019;57(4):313–20. https://doi.org/10.4193/
Rhin18.292.
62. Rondón C, Eguíluz-Gracia I, Shamji MH, et al. IgE test in secretions of patients with
respiratory allergy. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2018;18(12):67. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11882-018-0821-7.
63. Vanderhaegen T, Gengler I, Dendooven A, Chenivesse C, Lefèvre G, Mortuaire G.Eosinophils
in the eld of nasal polyposis: towards a better understanding of biologic therapies. Clinic Rev
Allerg Immunol. 2022;62(1):90–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12016-021-08844-7.
64. Bystrom J, Amin K, Bishop-Bailey D. Analysing the eosinophil cationic protein—a clue
to the function of the eosinophil granulocyte. Respir Res. 2011;12(1):1–20. https://doi.
org/10.1186/1465-9921-12-10.
235

Smell Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
AliTürkcan, NurayBayar Muluk, andPhilippeRombaux
18.1 Introduction
Deterioration of the sense of smell can be either quantitative (a reduction in intensity) or qualitative (a change in quality or degree of distortion). To a greater extent
than via history, olfactory testing can reveal quantitative impairment (such as distortion) [1].
Clinical olfactory testing presents a patient with an olfactory probe to his or her
nose and records the individual’s reaction. This type of evaluation is sometimes
called “psychophysical testing” [2, 3]. Patients undergoing olfactory testing should
be cooperative, able to follow directions, and articulate their preferences [2]. Odor
identication and odor discrimination tests are examples of suprathreshold olfactory testing. Olfactory threshold tests fall into a similar category. Supranasal tests
are more likely to evaluate the central processing of olfactory information. In contrast, odor threshold tests are more likely to evaluate the peripheral olfactory ability
(such as the conductive and sensorineural function of the nose) [2, 4]. Consequently,
olfactory testing [1] might consist of both odor threshold tests and suprathreshold tests.
18
A. Türkcan
Department of Otolaryngology, Van Research and Training Hospital, Van, Türkiye
N. Bayar Muluk (*)
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, Kırıkkale University,
Kırıkkale, Türkiye
P. Rombaux
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, and Institute of Neurosciences, Catholic University of
Louvain, Saint Luc University Clinics, Brussels, Belgium
e-mail: Philippe.Rombaux@uclouvain.be
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2024
H. Yüksel et al. (eds.), Pediatric Airway Diseases, Comprehensive ENT,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-74853-0_18
237

238
A. Türkcan et al.
18.2 Possible Olfactory Disorder Diagnosis
18.2.1 Conductive Defects
Many problems with smell may be traced back to inammation. Some examples
include allergic rhinitis, acute rhinitis, and toxic rhinitis (caused by cocaine usage).
Despite effective allergic, medicinal, and surgical treatment, the gradual mucosal
illness caused by chronic rhinosinusitis frequently results in impaired olfactory
function.
The olfactory epithelium may not receive odorants if a mass blocks the nasal
cavity. Nasal polyps, inverted papilloma, and other nasal tumors are the most prevalent conditions [5].
Obstruction can also be caused by congenital disabilities, including encephaloceles and dermoid cysts [5].
Hyposmia is caused by decreased or eliminated nasal airow and is common
in patients with a laryngectomy or tracheotomy. Lack of early stimulation of the
olfactory system [5] is a possible explanation for long-term difculties with
olfaction in children who have had tracheotomies and are subsequently
decannulated.
18.2.2 Defects intheCentral Nervous System or thePeripheral
Nervous System
Infectious and inammatory diseases exacerbate central abnormalities in olfaction
and transmission. Although a viral URTI can cause a loss of smell because it replaces
olfactory neuroepithelium with respiratory epithelium, research suggests that stem
cells persist, opening the door to the possibility of olfactory epithelial regeneration
in some cases. In these circumstances, restoring the sense of smell might take
months, even years, and in rare cases, may never happen at all. The inability to smell
is a symptom of several disorders, including multiple sclerosis, Wegener granulomatosis, and sarcoidosis (which affects brain structures). Although chronic rhinosinusitis was formerly assumed to be primarily a conductive problem due to mucosal
edema and polyp development, recent research suggests that it also disrupts the
neuroepithelium, leading to permanent loss of olfactory receptors due to upregulated apoptosis [5].
18.2.3 Inherited Disorders
Some congenital disorders have been linked to a decline in brain function. Genetic
olfactory dysfunction, such as that seen in people with Kallmann syndrome, results
from underdevelopment of the olfactory system and hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. One research showed that patients with Kallmann syndrome lacked the vomeronasal organ [5].

18 Smell Testing: Purpose, Procedure, Interpretation
239
18.2.3.1 Hormonal Disturbances
Olfactory function may be impacted by endocrine disorders (such as hypothyroidism, hypoadrenalism, and diabetes mellitus) [5].
18.2.3.2 Systemic andInhalant Drug Toxicity
Olfactory impairment may be caused by the toxicity of systemic or inhaled medicines (such as aminoglycosides or formaldehyde). Alcohol, nicotine, chemical solvents, and zinc salts applied topically are some drugs and molecules that might
affect your sense of smell [6].
18.3 Anatomy oftheOlfactory System
The olfactory neuroepithelium is found above the cribriform plate, the superior
nasal septum, and the superior-lateral nasal wall of each nasal chamber. In this pseudostratied neuroepithelium, the primary olfactory receptors are located. This
region is a thick neural sheet in newborns, but it is interdigitated with respiratory
and olfactory tissues in adolescents and adults. Humans’ olfactory neuron count
declines with aging. The olfactory epithelium is made up of olfactory sensory neurons and includes basal cells that enable regeneration of the epithelium and the
olfactory sensory neurons themselves [5, 7].
The ability to smell relies on olfactory receptor cells activated by volatile substances. The olfactory receptors can only be activated if molecules in the air touch
them as they travel through the nasal canal on relatively turbulent air currents.
Retronasal olfaction refers to the process by which odorants enter the nose from the
back, through the nasopharynx, and then travel to the olfactory receptor. Flavor
perception while eating and drinking is widely believed to be facilitated by this
process. To reach the olfactory receptor [8], odorants must rst penetrate the mucosal membrane. The intensity of an aroma is proportional to the time, volume, and
speed with which it is inhaled [5].
There is a primary sensory bipolar neuron in each olfactory receptor cell. More
than 100 million of these neurons are in the typical nasal cavity. In contrast to other
neurons, olfactory neurons are continually produced by the underlying basal cells.
Each new receptor cell is created on average every 30–60days [5].
Each new receptor cell develops connections with mitral and tufted cells in the
olfactory bulb [5] via an axon (CN I) sent to the central nervous system.
There is a lengthy central process on the bipolar olfactory neurons and a shorter
peripheral process. The mucosal surface is covered in a thick mat of immobile cilia,
and the peripheral process continues to the mucosa, where it terminates in an olfactory knob. Odorant interactions are mediated by receptors expressed in the cilia.
G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) linked to adenylate cyclase comprise the odor
receptor protein family. Linda Buck and Richard Axel won the Nobel Prize in 2004
[5] for discovering the genes that encode them in 1991.
The most prominent gene family in the human genome consists of over 900
members. Since each neuron in a mouse only expresses a single gene, odorants are
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
