Skip to main content
Log in

A time-saving method for recording chemosensory event-related potentials

  • Rhinology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to reduce the recording duration of chemosensory event-related potentials (CSERP) and thereby to make the method more suitable for routine clinical use. Measurements were performed in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology of the university hospital of Cologne. Two protocols with different sequences [inter-stimulus intervals (ISI)-standard sequence: 30 s; PRS-15: pseudo-randomized sequence, mean ISI of 15 s] were applied to 40 volunteers to record CSERPs. To compare CSERP recordings under optimal and adverse test conditions, 20 younger/normosmic adults and 20 older/hyposmic participants were included in this study. Olfactory function was gauged using the “Sniffin’Sticks” test. For CSERP recordings, phenylethyl alcohol, hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide were used for olfactory or trigeminal stimulation, respectively. Both ISI protocols allowed recording CSERPs under optimal and adverse test conditions and distinguishing both groups by latencies (p ≤ 0.015). The time requirement for the recording of CSERPs with the PRS-15 sequence was less than 30 min. The pseudo-randomized sequence allowed the recording of diagnostically conclusive CSERPs in both groups and saved approximately 40% of the measuring time. This seems to be especially useful in cases where a yes/no answer (e.g., medical reports, exclusion of anosmia) is required. Shortening the time requirement significantly allows applying CSERPs to larger populations of patients with olfactory impairment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hummel T, Sekinger B, Wolf SR, Pauli E, Kobal G (1997) Sniffin’ Sticks: olfactory performance assessed by the combined testing of odor identification, odor discrimination and olfactory threshold. Chem Senses 22:39–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hummel T, Kobal G, Gudziol H, Mackay-Sim A (2007) Normative data for the “Sniffin’ Sticks” including tests of odor identification, odor discrimination, and olfactory thresholds: an upgrade based on a group of more than 3,000 subjects. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264:237–243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kobal G (1981) Elektrophysiologische untersuchungen des menschlichen geruchssinns. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hummel T, Kobal G (2001) Olfactory event-related potentials. In: Simon SA, Nicolelis MAL (eds) Methods and frontiers in chemosensory research. CRC, Florida, pp 429–464

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kassab A, Schaub F, Vent J, Huttenbrink KB, Damm M (2009) Effects of short inter-stimulus intervals on olfactory and trigeminal event-related potentials. Acta Otolaryngol 129:1250–1256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Huart C, Eloy P, Collet S, Rombaux P (2011) Chemosensory function assessed with psychophysical testing and event-related potentials in patients with atrophic rhinitis Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

  7. Tateyama T, Hummel T, Roscher S, Post H, Kobal G (1998) Relation of olfactory event-related potentials to changes in stimulus concentration. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 108:449–455

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Boesveldt S, Haehner A, Berendse HW, Hummel T (2007) Signal-to-noise ratio of chemosensory event-related potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 118:690–695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Scheibe M, Opatz O, Hummel T (2009) Are there sex-related differences in responses to repetitive olfactory/trigeminal stimuli? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:1323–1326

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Covington JW, Polich J (1996) P300, stimulus intensity, and modality. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 100:579–584

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hawkes CH, Shephard BC, Daniel SE (1997) Olfactory dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 62:436–446

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hummel T, Barz S, Pauli E, Kobal G (1998) Chemosensory event-related potentials change with age. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 108:208–217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Livermore A, Hummel T (2004) The influence of training on chemosensory event-related potentials and interactions between the olfactory and trigeminal systems. Chem Senses 29:41–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Krauel K, Pause BM, Sojka B, Schott P, Ferstl R (1998) Attentional modulation of central odor processing. Chem Senses 23:423–432

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We have no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Damm.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 361 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schaub, F., Damm, M. A time-saving method for recording chemosensory event-related potentials. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 269, 2209–2217 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1921-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1921-3

Keywords

Navigation