ArticleBrain topography2026
Stimulating and Recording Brain Signals in an Olfactory Context: Non-Canonical Brain Structures May Contribute to Olfactory Processing - A Case Series.
Article in Brain topography, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlike some other sensory systems, the sense of smell does not benefit yet from a ready-to-use or advanced olfactory implant or prosthesis. The principle of an olfactory implant rests upon volatile compounds that are captured by sensors mimicking the olfactory epithelium, translating them into different stimulation patterns which are then sent to central brain structures. The potential of stimulating a brain structure that does not seem to belong to the primary olfactory pathway, but is part of olfactory networks, has to our knowledge not been considered. We report a case series of patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy who underwent stereoencephalography (SEEG) for diagnostic reasons, including intracranial stimulation. Firstly, the patients performed a task of passive smelling of two odors (peach and fish), during which electroencephalographic signals were recorded. In a second phase, intracranial electrical stimulation was applied. In two patients, this evoked olfactory sensations specifically after stimulation respectively of the amygdala or temporal pole. Based on these observations, a post-hoc analysis of the SEEG data from the passive smelling task was conducted, focusing on these two structures. Functional connectivity measures have been calculated in different frequency bands using the amygdala or the temporal pole as seeds. Although conclusions are limited due to the small sample size, the results along with the literature underline the interest of considering non-primary olfactory structures, such as the temporal pole, as a contributor to olfactory processing. The efficacy of a potential olfactory implant may rely not only on the primary location of stimulation, but also in the type of oscillations elicited and potential engagement of association brain structures.
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.