Significant Underreporting of Preoperative Hyposmia in Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Skull Base Surgery: Discrepancies Between Subjective and Objective Measurements

Abstract

Objective The assessment of baseline olfactory function before endoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS) has been relatively limited compared with analysis before functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). Our study addresses this knowledge gap, assessing preoperative olfactory function in ESBS and FESS and elucidating any differences.

Study Design We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing anterior ESBS or FESS at a single institution between 2021 and 2022. We included 171 patients and compared their reported and measured preoperative olfactory function using the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test questionnaire and the 40-item University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test.

Results Of the 171 patients included in this study, 30% of patients underwent ESBS and 70% underwent FESS. Of all patients, only 57% correctly reported their objective preoperative olfactory function. Of the 36 ESBS patients with measured preoperative hyposmia, only 31% correctly reported hyposmia, while 69% incorrectly reported normosmia. This distribution significantly differs (p < 0.0001) from the FESS subset (89 patients), with 64% correctly reporting hyposmia and 36% incorrectly reporting normosmia.

Conclusion Our analysis demonstrates higher than anticipated underreporting of preoperative hyposmia in patients undergoing ESBS as well as discrepancies between subjective and objective olfactory functions in the FESS population. The results highlight several gaps in knowledge regarding perioperative olfactory function that would be best examined with more thorough pre- and postoperative objective olfactory testing. This analysis demonstrates significant prognostic uncertainty for patients and providers and creates significant medicolegal uncertainty regarding the appropriate attribution of postoperative olfactory loss in cases without objective preoperative testing.

Keywords

endoscopic skull base surgery - extended endoscopic approach - functional endoscopic sinus surgery - olfactory function - olfactory dysfunction - olfaction - hyposmia - anosmia - smell loss

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 06. Juni 2023

Angenommen: 12. September 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
08. November 2023

• References

• 1 Patel MR, Stadler ME, Snyderman CH. et al. How to choose? Endoscopic skull base reconstructive options and limitations. Skull Base 2010; 20 (06) 397-404
• 2 Zhang M, Singh H, Almodovar-Mercado GJ, Anand VK, Schwartz TH. Required reading: the most impactful articles in endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery. World Neurosurg 2016; 92: 499-512.e2
• 3 Kikuchi M, Nakagawa T. Recent progress in endoscopic skull base surgery: functional preservation and multiportal approaches. Auris Nasus Larynx 2022; 50 (01) 32-39
• 4 Eloy JA, Vivero RJ, Hoang K. et al. Comparison of transnasal endoscopic and open craniofacial resection for malignant tumors of the anterior skull base. Laryngoscope 2009; 119 (05) 834-840
• 5 Zhu J, Feng K, Tang C. et al. Olfactory outcomes after endonasal skull base surgery: a systematic review. Neurosurg Rev 2021; 44 (04) 1805-1814
• 6 Alobid I, Enseñat J, Mariño-Sánchez F. et al. Impairment of olfaction and mucociliary clearance after expanded endonasal approach using vascularized septal flap reconstruction for skull base tumors. Neurosurgery 2013; 72 (04) 540-546
• 7 Rioja E, Bernal-Sprekelsen M, Enriquez K. et al. Long-term outcomes of endoscopic endonasal approach for skull base surgery: a prospective study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 273 (07) 1809-1817
• 8 Hong SD, Nam DH, Seol HJ. et al. Endoscopic binostril versus transnasal transseptal microscopic pituitary surgery: Sinonasal quality of life and olfactory function. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2015; 29 (03) 221-225
• 9 Kim DH, Hong YK, Jeun SS. et al. Endoscopic endonasal transsphenoidal approach from the surgeon point of view. J Craniofac Surg 2017; 28 (04) 959-962
• 10 Griffiths CF, Barkhoudarian G, Cutler A. et al. Analysis of olfaction after bilateral nasoseptal rescue flap transsphenoidal approach with olfactory mucosal preservation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019; 161 (05) 881-889
• 11 Hura N, Orlov CP, Khalafallah AM, Mukherjee D, Rowan NR. Impact of routine endoscopic skull base surgery on subjective olfaction and gustation outcomes. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2021; 21 (03) 137-142
• 12 Novák V, Hrabálek L, Hoza J, C Hučko, Pohlodek D, Macura J. Sinonasal quality of life in patients after an endoscopic endonasal surgery of a sellar tumour. Sci Rep 2021; 11 (01) 23351
• 13 Chou CT, Valappil B, Mattos JL. et al. The effect of nasoseptal flap elevation on post-operative olfaction and sinonasal quality of life: a prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2021; 35 (03) 353-360
• 14 Alanin MC, Hopkins C. Effect of functional endoscopic sinus surgery on outcomes in chronic rhinosinusitis. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2020; 20 (07) 27
• 15 Daramola OO, Chandra RK. Chronic rhinosinusitis and endoscopic sinus surgery. World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018; 4 (01) 29-32
• 16 Chen FH, Deng J, Hong HY. et al. Extensive versus functional endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and asthma: a 1-year study. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2016; 30 (02) 143-148
• 17 Boesveldt S, Postma EM, Boak D. et al. Anosmia—a Clinical Review. Chem Senses 2017; 42 (07) 513-523
• 18 Croy I, Nordin S, Hummel T. Olfactory disorders and quality of life—an updated review. Chem Senses 2014; 39 (03) 185-194
• 19 Jang SS, Choi JS, Kim JH, Kim N, Ference EH. Discordance between subjective and objective measures of smell and taste in US adults. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2022; 166 (03) 572-579
• 20 Chaaban MR, Chaudhry AL, Riley KO, Woodworth BA. Objective assessment of olfaction after transsphenoidal pituitary surgery. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2015; 29 (05) 365-368
• 21 Desiato VM, Levy DA, Byun YJ, Nguyen SA, Soler ZM, Schlosser RJ. The prevalence of olfactory dysfunction in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2021; 35 (02) 195-205
• 22 Patel AM, Still TE, Vaughan W. Medicolegal issues in endoscopic sinus surgery. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2010; 43 (04) 905-914
• 23 Dawson DE, Kraus EM. Medical malpractice and rhinology. Am J Rhinol 2007; 21 (05) 584-590
• 24 Wolf JS, Chiu AG, Palmer JN, O'Malley Jr BW, Schofield K, Taylor RJ. Informed consent in endoscopic sinus surgery: the patient perspective. Laryngoscope 2005; 115 (03) 492-494
• 25 Cottrill E, Becker SS, DeLaurentis D. Pearls and pitfalls: medico-legal considerations for sinus surgery. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014; 22 (01) 75-79
• 26 Stankiewicz JA, Hotaling J. Medicolegal issues in endoscopic sinus surgery and complications. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2015; 48 (05) 827-837
• 27 Winford TW, Wallin JL, Clinger JD, Graham AM. Malpractice in treatment of sinonasal disease by otolaryngologists: a review of the past 10 years. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015; 152 (03) 536-540