1 1 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors Satellite DEVELOPMENT ...

sniffing behavior. Furthermore, we recommend against use of RIP.141 Poster Chemosensory Coding and ClinicalOLFACTORY DETECTION THRESHOLDS IN HUNGER ANDSATIETYSchreder T. 1 , Albrecht J. 1 , Rzeznicka A. 1 , Schöpf V. 1 , Anzinger A. 1 ,Demmel M. 1 , Pollatos O. 1 , Kopietz R. 1 , Linn J. 1 , Wiesmann M. 1 1 Dept.of Neuroradiology, University of Munich, Munich, GermanyObjectives: Several investigators reported the existence of foodrelatedchanges in olfactory sensitivity but the findings are highlydiverse. We investigated whether olfactory detection thresholds arecorrelated with food intake. Methods: Using the Sniffin´ Sticks,sensitivity to the non-food odor n-butanol and the food-odor isoamylacetate was assessed when hungry (overnight fast) and satiated (after astandardized breakfast, 668 ± 135 calories) in twenty-four femalesubjects with normal olfactory function. Results and Conclusions: Wefound no consistent pattern of changes in olfactory detection thresholdsrelated to food intake (n-butanol 10.2 ± 1.9 vs. 10.3 ± 1.9, isoamylacetate 11.4 ± 2.5 vs. 12.5 ± 2.7). Ratings regarding valence and arousalof the subjects as well as ratings of pleasantness (n-butanol 5.96 ± 2.07vs. 6.08 ± 2.06, isoamyl acetate 2.29 ± 1.00 vs. 2.67 ± 1.13) andintensity of the odors (n-butanol 7.63 ± 1.21 vs. 7.38 ± 1.47, isoamylacetate 7.13 ± 1.70 vs. 7.13 ± 1.36) did not differ significantly betweenhunger and satiety. In summary, we could not find any evidence thatfood intake has effects on olfactory function in healthy subjects.142 Poster Chemosensory Coding and ClinicalLATERALIZATION OF ODOR IDENTIFICATIONGudziol V. 1 , Zahnert T. 2 , Hummel C. 2 1 Dresden Medical School,Dresden, Germany; 2 Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University ofDresden Medical School, Germany, Dresden, GermanyAims of the present study were (1) to investigate the frequency oflateralized differences in olfactory function and (2) to correlate the selfassessment of olfactory sensitivity with the results from measuredolfactory function. To this end all participants rated their olfactorysensitivity as “complete loss,” “bad,” “normal,” “good,” or “excellent.”Odor identification of over 1700 subjects (652 women, 1063 men) wasobtained with a 12-item test from the “Sniffin´ Sticks” test battery. Allodors were applied to each nostril in a randomized order while thecontralateral nostril was closed. Group analyses revealed that selfassessment of olfactory sensitivity correlated well with the results of theolfactory screening test (r1715 = 0.51; p < 0.001). On an individuallevel, however, ratings of olfactory sensitivity exhibited significantdifferences from the results of olfactory testing. Ninety-three percent ofhealthy subjects (n = 479) demonstrated a side difference of three orless points. In patients with nasal symptoms (n = 1236) this figure was86%. Lateralized differences were largest in subjects with decreasedolfactory function. In conclusion, lateralized differences in odoridentification are no rare finding.143 Poster Chemosensory Coding and ClinicalTHE CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND PATHOGENESISOF DYSOSMIAMiwa T. 1 , Tsukatani T. 1 , Furukawa M. 1 1 Otorhinolaryngology,Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, JapanThe majority of patients having problems with smell sensationcomplain of hyposmia or anosmia. Although many of these patients alsohave dysosmia, a distorted olfactory sensation, the clinicalcharacteristics and pathogenesis of dysosmia remains obscure. In thisstudy, 308 patients who came to our clinic were analyzed to determinethe status of their dysosmia using clinical records and questionnaires.The most common cause of their olfactory disturbance wasnasosinusitis, however the incidence of dysosmia was not very high.More than 50% of the patients having a sensorineural olfactorydisturbance such as post upper respiratory infection (URI) or headinjury complained of olfactory distortion. The onset and sensation ofdysosmia was different for patients with post URI compared to headinjury. The 83% of the patients with post URI reported that they felt adifferent odor from the original odor and 46% of post URI patientscould only experience a limited number of odor sensations. Thesesensations started several months from the onset of the olfactorydisturbance. On the other hand, the rate of patients reporting distortedsmell sensation in the absence of an odor stimulus was higher inpatients with head injury than for post URI. Based on these results andrecent discoveries regarding odor recognition mechanisms, wehypothesize the following underlying causes of dysosmia for post URIand head injury. In post URI dysosmia is likely to occur due to themisdirection of regenerating axons, while for posttraumatic olfactorydisturbances the cause is more likely to be due to damage in olfactoryregions of the brain.144 Poster Chemosensory Coding and ClinicalTHE HEDONIC DATABASE OF SMELL-FRANKONIA(HEDOS-F) – AN ANALYSIS OF GENDER DIFFERENCESThuerauf N. 1 , Reulbach U. 1 , Lunkenheimer J. 1 , Spannenberger R. 1 ,Vassiliadu A. 2 , Markovic K. 1 1 Department of Psychiatry andPsychotherapy, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bavaria,Germany; 2 Department of Neurology, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg,Erlangen, Bavaria, GermanyThe Sniffin Stick Test has been employed widely in order to assessolfactory function in health and disease. The hedonic evaluation of thetest odors still remains to be investigated. Thus, the aims of our projectwere (1) to collect hedonic and intensity estimates in a large humanpopulation and (2) to install a hedonic database suited to analyse theinfluence on hedonic and intensity estimates of the following factors:age, gender, site of stimulation, threshold, odor discrimation andidentification. 201 volunteers participated in our study (mean age: 42.0± 16.3, minimum age: 19 years, maximum age: 83 years, males: 103,females: 98). We executed the Sniffin Stick Test and registeredintensity and hedonic estimates using an analogue rating scale. Theoverall hedonic estimate for all odors was 12.5 ± 18.4 (right) and 11.5 ±17.4 (left) (unpleasantness/pleasantness scale: -100 to +100) indicatingthat the test is relatively balanced. The statistical analysis of genderdifferences revealed significant differences for the odors `orange´,`lemon´, `clove´, `turpentine´, `apple´, `pineapple´, `rose´, `fish´ (Mann-Whitney-U-Test) indicating a gender specific emotional evaluation ofthese odors. Our results also demonstrate that the Sniffin Stick Test caneasily be extended by assessing intensity and hedonic estimates creatinga useful tool for investigating the emotional aspects of smell.36