ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2025
Topical Anesthesia and Olfactory Capability: A Pilot Study.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Topical Anesthesia and Olfactory Capability: A Pilot Study.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Topical anesthesia (TA) of the nasal fossa has been shown to be sufficient for patient comfort during nasal endoscopy. However, investigators need to know how soon after the administration of TA they can accurately evaluate olfactory capability. Thus, the main aim of this study was to assess, in healthy volunteers (HV), when the effects of TA wear off to accurately measure olfactory capability after its administration. Methods: A prospective, single-center, pilot study was conducted to evaluate the duration of the effect of TA on olfactory capability, using the UPSIT. Thirty healthy volunteers were recruited and analyzed. Following baseline testing (UPSIT), TA was administered intranasally (lidocaine + oxymetazoline). Then, participants underwent three additional UPSIT evaluations at distinct time points: immediately post-application (T0), 10 min (T + 10), and 30 min post-application (T + 30). The primary outcome was the change in UPSIT score from baseline to each subsequent time point. Paired Results: For the 30 HV included, the mean UPSIT at T0 was 32.8 ± 3.1. At T1, the mean UPSIT (29.6 ± 4.0) was significantly lower than at T0 (3.13 ± 3.7-point, Conclusion: Immediately after receiving 4 sprays per nostril, the mean UPSIT-with testing begun directly after the spray was administered-was significantly lower than baseline, dropping under the threshold for normal olfactory function. It was fully recovered by ten min. Level of Evidence: 3.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.