MENU

en menu

Articles

  • KSBNS 2024

Article Tools

View Full Text Abstract
Article as PDF Print this Article
Pubmed PMC
PubReader Export to Citation
Email Alerts Open Access

Share this article on :

Stats or Metrics

Related articles in EN

Article

Original Article

Exp Neurobiol 2024; 33(2): 99-106

Published online April 30, 2024

https://doi.org/10.5607/en24007

© The Korean Society for Brain and Neural Sciences

Changes in Structural Covariance among Olfactory-related Brain Regions in Anosmia Patients

Suji Lee1†, Yumi Song2,3†, Haejin Hong2, Yoonji Joo2, Eunji Ha2, Youngeun Shim2,3, Seung-No Hong4, Jungyoon Kim2,3, In Kyoon Lyoo2,3,5, Sujung Yoon2,3* and Dae Woo Kim4*

1College of Pharmacy, Dongduk Women’s University, Seoul 02748, 2Ewha Brain Institute, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, 3Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, 4Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Boramae Medical Center, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul 07061, 5Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, Korea

Correspondence to: *To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sujung Yoon, TEL: 82-2-3277-2478, FAX: 82-2-3277-6562
e-mail: sujungjyoon@ewha.ac.kr
Dae Woo Kim, TEL: 82-2-870-2446, FAX: 82-2-831-2826
e-mail: kicubi73@gmail.com
†These authors contributed equally to this article.

Received: March 11, 2024; Revised: April 1, 2024; Accepted: April 9, 2024

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Anosmia, characterized by the loss of smell, is associated not only with dysfunction in the peripheral olfactory system but also with changes in several brain regions involved in olfactory processing. Specifically, the orbitofrontal cortex is recognized for its pivotal role in integrating olfactory information, engaging in bidirectional communication with the primary olfactory regions, including the olfactory cortex, amygdala, and entorhinal cortex. However, little is known about alterations in structural connections among these brain regions in patients with anosmia. In this study, high-resolution T1-weighted images were obtained from participants. Utilizing the volumes of key brain regions implicated in olfactory function, we employed a structural covariance approach to investigate brain reorganization patterns in patients with anosmia (n=22) compared to healthy individuals (n=30). Our structural covariance analysis demonstrated diminished connectivity between the amygdala and entorhinal cortex, components of the primary olfactory network, in patients with anosmia compared to healthy individuals (z=-2.22, FDR-corrected p=0.039). Conversely, connectivity between the orbitofrontal cortex—a major region in the extended olfactory network—and amygdala was found to be enhanced in the anosmia group compared to healthy individuals (z=2.32, FDR-corrected p=0.039). However, the structural connections between the orbitofrontal cortex and entorhinal cortex did not differ significantly between the groups (z=0.04, FDR-corrected p=0.968). These findings suggest a potential structural reorganization, particularly of higher-order cortical regions, possibly as a compensatory effort to interpret the limited olfactory information available in individuals with olfactory loss.

Graphical Abstract


Keywords: Anosmia, Amygdala, Entorhinal cortex, Orbitofrontal cortex, Structural covariance analysis

INTRODUCTION

Anosmia, the loss of the sense of smell, can significantly impact the psychological and behavioral aspects of human life, given that smell is closely linked to emotion, memory, social interaction, and hedonic experience [1]. Beyond dysfunctions in the peripheral olfactory system, anosmia is associated with structural and functional changes in several brain regions involved in olfactory processing [2-4]. Consequently, anosmia can increase the risk of developing psychiatric conditions such as depression and anxiety [5, 6]. Additionally, anosmia is recognized as both an early symptom and a risk factor for neurological conditions like dementia and Alzheimer’s disease [7].

Previous neuroimaging studies, including our own [8], have demonstrated the structural brain alterations associated with anosmia [3, 9]. These studies have focused on regions within both the primary olfactory network, such as the olfactory cortex, amygdala, and entorhinal cortex, and the secondary olfactory network, including the orbitofrontal cortex [3, 9, 10]. Research has consistently identified volume loss in the olfactory bulb and olfactory cortex—critical for olfactory perception—as being directly linked to olfactory dysfunction [3, 4]. However, findings on changes in other higher-order brain structures implicated in the modulation of olfactory information, remain inconsistent [4]. These inconsistencies may reflect the complex and interactive brain responses to insufficient olfactory perception.

Specifically, brain regions including the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex are recognized for their essential role in olfactory processing, particularly through their complex and reciprocal interactions [3, 10, 11]. Therefore, moving beyond the traditional focus on individual brain structures in anosmia research, assessing the connectivity and interactions among these key brain regions is essential for enhancing our understanding of the complex brain mechanisms underlying anosmia.

Structural covariance analysis has recently been utilized to investigate the structural connections and organization among various brain regions [12, 13]. This method involves assessing the covariation patterns across different brain regions by analyzing the correlation of regional volumes or thickness measures within a group. Such covariance patterns are indicative of structural connections between the corresponding brain regions and can be influenced by a range of factors, including developmental or genetic factors, as well as acquired factors like the impact of sensory deprivation or stimulation [14, 15]. Accordingly, structural covariance analysis has been successfully used to study the influence of various neuropsychiatric diseases on connections between brain regions involved in cognitive and emotional processing [16, 17]. However, to the best of our knowledge, this approach has not yet been applied to explore how anosmia affects structural connections within the brain regions critical for olfactory processing.

Therefore, we employed the structural covariance analysis to compare the structural covariance patterns of the key brain regions—specifically focusing on the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex—that play a crucial role in olfactory processing, between patients with anosmia and healthy individuals. We hypothesize that anosmia will lead to altered structural covariance among these olfactory-related brain regions, potentially reflecting disruptions in olfactory function or compensatory mechanisms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants

Participants of this study were derived from a previously reported study [8], comprising 22 patients with anosmia and 30 healthy individuals. Anosmia is defined as a persistent inability to perceive odors for a duration of at least one month and was confirmed through nasal endoscopic examinations and olfactory function evaluations. Olfactory function was assessed using the butanol threshold test [18, 19]. This test involves presenting participants with a series of ten dilutions of 4% N-butanol in mineral oil. Starting with the most dilute concentration, participants were asked to distinguish between butanol and mineral oil. The test progressed to more concentrated solutions until the participant correctly identified butanol in four successive attempts, thereby establishing their olfactory sensitivity threshold. Anosmia was diagnosed in individuals with thresholds at levels 0~1 [19].

Individuals with major medical, neurological, or psychiatric disorders, or those with contraindications for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were excluded from the study.

The research protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Ewha W. University, and all participants provided written informed consent prior to participation.

Image data acquisition and volume measurements

High-resolution T1-weighted MRI images were acquired using a 3.0 Tesla Magnetic Resonance scanner (Achieva, Philips Medical Systems, Best, the Netherlands). Due to an update in imaging parameters during the research, two scanning protocols for T1-weighted images were employed. Protocol 1 was administered to a portion of the anosmia group (n=16), while protocol 2 was applied to the rest of the anosmia participants (n=6) and all control subjects (n=30). Protocol 1 settings included: a repetition time (TR) of 7.4 ms, echo time (TE) of 3.4 ms, a flip angle of 8°, a slice thickness of 1.0 mm without any interslice gap, a field of view (FOV) of 220×220 mm2, and a matrix size of 220×209. Protocol 2 adjusted the FOV and matrix size, setting them to 224 mm and 224×216, respectively. In addition, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) imaging was performed to identify any structural abnormalities within the brain, utilizing parameters such as a TR of 4,800 ms, TE at the shortest, an inversion time of 1,650 ms, a FOV of 240×240 mm2, and a matrix size of 216×216.

Volume measurements of the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex—critical regions implicated in olfactory processing—were conducted using the FreeSurfer 7.2 (http://www.surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/). The data processing workflow included the following steps: motion correction, skull stripping, automated Talairach transformation, parcellation of white and grey matter, intensity normalization, tessellation of brain boundaries, topology correction, and surface deformation [20, 21]. An experienced researcher carefully reviewed each step of cortical reconstruction and the generated images.

Structural covariance analysis using volume data

We employed structural covariance analysis to estimate connectivity strength among the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex, based on regional volume data [12, 22, 23] (Fig. 1). For this analysis, partial correlation analysis was performed to calculate correlation coefficients between each pair of brain regions, controlling for intracranial volume. These partial correlation coefficients reflect the group-level connectivity strength among the specified brain regions. We then converted these coefficients into z-values using Fisher’s r-to-z transformation [24]. To assess differences in the connectivity strength between the groups, z-test statistics were applied. This analysis specifically determined whether the group-level correlation coefficient in the anosmia group was significantly greater or smaller than those in the control group, taking into account the sample size of each group [24, 25]. We applied a false discovery rate (FDR) correction set at q=0.05 to adjust for multiple comparisons [26]. The statistical analysis was conducted using R software, version 4.3.2 (the R Foundation, Vienna, Austria).

Statistical analysis

Demographic variables were compared between groups using independent t-test for continuous variable and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at a two-tailed p<0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata SE version 16.0 (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas, USA).

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics, including age, gender, and handedness, did not show significant differences between the groups. The median duration of anosmia was 4 years, ranging from 1 to 21 years. Chronic rhinosinusitis was the primary cause of anosmia (n=15, 68.2%), while idiopathic causes accounted for 31.8% of cases (n=7). Participant characteristics are provided in Table 1.

Structural covariance analysis demonstrated the group-level connectivity strength among the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex for both the control (Fig. 2A) and anosmia (Fig. 2B) groups (Table 2). We compared the connectivity strength between the groups using z-test statistics, as detailed in Table 3 and Fig. 2C.

In the anosmia group, the connectivity strength between the amygdala and entorhinal cortex was found to be weaker compared to that in the control group (z=-2.22, FDR-corrected p=0.039). Conversely, a higher connectivity strength between the orbitofrontal cortex and amygdala was observed in the anosmia group than in the control group (z=2.32, FDR-corrected p=0.039). However, there was no significant difference in the connectivity strength between the orbitofrontal cortex and entorhinal cortex across the groups (z=0.04, FDR-corrected p=0.968).

DISCUSSION

In this study, we employed structural covariance analysis to investigate brain reorganization patterns in key areas involved in olfactory processing: the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex. We observed the reduced connection between regions of the primary olfactory network, specifically between the amygdala and entorhinal cortex, in the anosmia group. In contrast, the structural connections between the orbitofrontal cortex—a critical component of the secondary olfactory network—and the amygdala were enhanced in the anosmia group compared to the control group.

Our findings of reduced structural integration among key regions within the primary olfactory network align with prior studies that reported atrophic changes in the primary olfactory cortex associated with anosmia [27-29]. Brain regions within this network are crucial for detecting and initial processing of olfactory information [30, 31]. Considering that acquired anosmia frequently results from damage to the primary olfactory network due to traumatic brain injury or upper respiratory tract infection [32-34], the structural disintegration observed in our study reflects a major pathological mechanism of anosmia.

Furthermore, regions of the primary olfactory cortex, such as the amygdala and entorhinal cortex, are crucial for linking odors to emotional responses and memories [35, 36]. This integration is essential for assigning emotional values to smells and memory formation, enabling the recall and recognition of odors [37, 38]. Moreover, damage to the entorhinal cortex can significantly impair the ability to learn and retain new olfactory information [39]. From a clinical perspective, the structural disintegration observed in olfactory-related brain regions, including the amygdala and entorhinal cortex, may explain why anosmia can manifest as an early symptom of cognitive decline in conditions like dementia or Alzheimer’s disease [7, 27, 40]. Furthermore, our observed connectivity reduction has clinical implications for patients with anosmia, potentially affecting cognitive and memory functions [41, 42]. Taken together, these findings highlight the importance of a comprehensive approach in understanding and addressing the multifaceted consequences of olfactory loss.

Another significant finding of this study is the enhanced structural connections between the orbitofrontal cortex and amygdala in the anosmia group compared to the control group. The orbitofrontal cortex, as a higher-order olfactory region, plays a crucial role in integrating olfactory information with inputs from other sensory modalities [43-46]. Specifically, the orbitofrontal cortex can receive inputs from taste, visual, and tactile senses, while also maintaining reciprocal connections with primary olfactory network regions. This multimodal sensory integration enables a comprehensive and unified perception of the environment [43]. Furthermore, this process is crucial not only for recognizing and responding to complex stimuli but also for the cognitive and emotional aspects of olfaction [44].

Therefore, our observations of enhanced structural connections between the orbitofrontal cortex and amygdala, a major component of the primary olfactory network, suggest a potential compensatory adaptation of the brain to insufficient olfactory input. Specifically, these alterations may enhance the processing of residual olfactory cues by strengthening the integration of alternative sensory modalities in patients with anosmia. Consistent with prior findings that brain adaptations to visual deficits can improve auditory processing capabilities [47, 48], our results of strengthened structural integration between primary and secondary olfactory network regions might reflect cross-modal neuroplastic changes in response to the loss of olfactory sensation [49, 50].

It is important to note that our analysis revealed no significant alterations in structural covariance between the orbitofrontal cortex and entorhinal cortex across the study groups. Considering the average disease duration of approximately 5.7 years in our patient group, our results might suggest the reversible changes or neuronal reorganization in response to the loss of olfactory sensation, rather than irreversible neuronal damage within the brain’s olfactory network. This finding holds potential clinical relevance, providing brain anatomical insights that could guide targeted interventions for anosmia patients. However, further longitudinal research investigating both acute and chronic anosmia cases is necessary to confirm and refine our findings.

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the results. Notably, this study did not examine the structural covariance of the piriform cortex, a crucial part of the primary olfactory cortex, with other olfactory-related brain regions. This was partly due to the limitations in segmenting this region using the FreeSurfer framework. Future studies should investigate a broader range of olfactory circuit regions to validate and expand upon our findings. The relatively small sample size and the cross-sectional design of our study could potentially limit the generalizability and inferential power of our findings. Large-scale, longitudinal studies on anosmia patients are needed to validate our results and more comprehensively investigate the reversibility of structural covariance alterations.

The structural covariance analysis of brain regional volumes does not yield individual measures for structural connections, as it relies on the correlation coefficient across a group of subjects [51]. Consequently, we could not directly investigate the relationship between structural connections of olfactory-related brain regions and other clinical measures. Future studies utilizing diffusion tensor imaging could offer individual-level assessments of structural connectivity within the olfactory network. This would provide further insights and potentially support our findings suggesting a compensatory role of enhanced structural connections in anosmia patients.

In conclusion, our study reveals structural reorganization of the brain associated with anosmia. We demonstrate diminished connectivity between the amygdala and entorhinal cortex highlighting the disruptive impact of anosmia on the olfactory processing network. Additionally, the enhanced connectivity between the orbitofrontal cortex and amygdala suggests potential compensatory mechanisms in response to olfactory loss. These findings indicate a potential restructuring of brain regions, especially involving the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex, as a response to olfactory deficits. Future research is necessary to explore the functional implications of these structural changes and their potential role in developing clinical interventions for anosmia.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was made possible through the support of the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Korean government [Grant Numbers: NRF-2020R1A6A1A03043528, NRF-2020M3E5D9080555, and RS-2023-00249051] and Main Research Program (E0232201) of the Korea Food Research Institute.

Figures

Fig. 1. Key brain regions implicated in olfactory processing: a focus of our study.
Fig. 2. Structural covariance analysis of key brain regions implicated in olfactory processing. Group-level correlation matrices for the control (A) and anosmia (B) groups illustrate the connectivity strength among the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex. The z-value matrix (C) represents comparisons of correlation coefficients between the control and anosmia groups. Positive z-values (red color) indicate stronger structural covariance in the anosmia group compared to the control group. Conversely, negative z-values (blue color) signify weaker structural covariance in the anosmia group relative to the control group. Asterisks in panel C indicate significant between-group differences after FDR correction.

Tables

Table. 1.

Characteristics of study participants

CharacteristicsControl (n=30)Anosmia (n=22)p
Age, years, mean (SD)48.5 (10.3)48.5 (10.3)0.25
Female, n (%)9 (30.0)9 (40.9)0.41
Right handedness, n (%)28 (93.3)20 (90.9)0.75
Duration of olfactory loss, years, mean (SD)NA5.7 (5.1)NA

Table. 2.

Group-level correlation coefficients reflecting conectivity strength among key brain regions in the control and anosmia groups

Key brain regionsControl (n=30)Anosmia (n=22)
Amygdala - Entorhinal cortex0.437-0.195
Orbitofrontal cortex - Amygdala-0.0060.597
Orbitofrontal cortex - Entorhinal cortex0.0560.071

Partial correlation analysis was performed within both the control and anomia groups to assess connectivity strength among the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex. Intracranial volumes were incorporated into the model as a relevant covariate.
Table. 3.

Comparisons of connectivity strength between key brain regions involved in olfactory processing acorss the control and anosmia groups

Key brain regionszFDR-corrected p
Amygdala - Entorhinal cortex-2.220.039
Orbitofrontal cortex - Amygdala2.320.039
Orbitofrontal cortex - Entorhinal cortex0.040.968

Z-test statistics were employed to compare the group-level correlation coefficients between the anosmia and control groups. P values were corrected for multiple comparisons using the False Discovery Rate (FDR) method.

References

  1. Boesveldt S, Parma V (2021) The importance of the olfactory system in human well-being, through nutrition and social behavior. Cell Tissue Res 383:559-567
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  2. Kollndorfer K, Jakab A, Mueller CA, Trattnig S, Schöpf V (2015) Effects of chronic peripheral olfactory loss on functional brain networks. Neuroscience 310:589-599
    Pubmed CrossRef
  3. Han P, Zang Y, Akshita J, Hummel T (2019) Magnetic resonance imaging of human olfactory dysfunction. Brain Topogr 32:987-997
    Pubmed CrossRef
  4. Manan HA, Yahya N, Han P, Hummel T (2022) A systematic review of olfactory-related brain structural changes in patients with congenital or acquired anosmia. Brain Struct Funct 227:177-202
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  5. Kohli P, Soler ZM, Nguyen SA, Muus JS, Schlosser RJ (2016) The association between olfaction and depression: a systematic review. Chem Senses 41:479-486
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  6. Kamath V, Paksarian D, Cui L, Moberg PJ, Turetsky BI, Merikangas KR (2018) Olfactory processing in bipolar disorder, major depression, and anxiety. Bipolar Disord 20:547-555
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Murphy C (2019) Olfactory and other sensory impairments in Alzheimer disease. Nat Rev Neurol 15:11-24
    Pubmed CrossRef
  8. Lee S, Kim J, Kim BJ, Kim RY, Ha E, Kim S, Hong SN, Lyoo IK, Kim DW (2022) Gray matter volume reduction in the emotional brain networks in adults with anosmia. J Neurosci Res 100:1321-1330
    Pubmed CrossRef
  9. Bothwell AR, Resnick SM, Ferrucci L, Tian Q (2023) Associations of olfactory function with brain structural and functional outcomes. A systematic review. Ageing Res Rev 92:102095
    Pubmed CrossRef
  10. Gottfried JA (2010) Central mechanisms of odour object perception. Nat Rev Neurosci 11:628-641
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  11. Kajiwara R, Tominaga T, Takashima I (2007) Olfactory information converges in the amygdaloid cortex via the piriform and entorhinal cortices: observations in the guinea pig isolated whole-brain preparation. Eur J Neurosci 25:3648-3658
    Pubmed CrossRef
  12. Duan X, Wang R, Xiao J, Li Y, Huang X, Guo X, Cao J, He L, He C, Ling Z, Shan X, Chen H, Kang X, Chen H (2020) Subcortical structural covariance in young children with autism spectrum disorder. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 99:109874
    Pubmed CrossRef
  13. Larivière S, Royer J, Rodríguez-Cruces R, Paquola C, Caligiuri ME, Gambardella A, Concha L, Keller SS, Cendes F, Yasuda CL, Bonilha L, Gleichgerrcht E, Focke NK, Domin M, von Podewills F, Langner S, Rummel C, Wiest R, Martin P, Kotikalapudi R, O'Brien TJ, Sinclair B, Vivash L, Desmond PM, Lui E, Vaudano AE, Meletti S, Tondelli M, Alhusaini S, Doherty CP, Cavalleri GL, Delanty N, Kälviäinen R, Jackson GD, Kowalczyk M, Mascalchi M, Semmelroch M, Thomas RH, Soltanian-Zadeh H, Davoodi-Bojd E, Zhang J, Winston GP, Griffin A, Singh A, Tiwari VK, Kreilkamp BAK, Lenge M, Guerrini R, Hamandi K, Foley S, Rüber T, Weber B, Depondt C, Absil J, Carr SJA, Abela E, Richardson MP, Devinsky O, Severino M, Striano P, Tortora D, Kaestner E, Hatton SN, Vos SB, Caciagli L, Duncan JS, Whelan CD, Thompson PM, Sisodiya SM, Bernasconi A, Labate A, McDonald CR, Bernasconi N, Bernhardt BC (2022) Structural network alterations in focal and generalized epilepsy assessed in a worldwide ENIGMA study follow axes of epilepsy risk gene expression. Nat Commun 13:4320
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  14. Alexander-Bloch A, Giedd JN, Bullmore E (2013) Imaging structural co-variance between human brain regions. Nat Rev Neurosci 14:322-336
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  15. Wen J, Nasrallah IM, Abdulkadir A, Satterthwaite TD, Yang Z, Erus G, Robert-Fitzgerald T, Singh A, Sotiras A, Boquet-Pujadas A, Mamourian E, Doshi J, Cui Y, Srinivasan D, Skampardoni I, Chen J, Hwang G, Bergman M, Bao J, Veturi Y, Zhou Z, Yang S, Dazzan P, Kahn RS, Schnack HG, Zanetti MV, Meisenzahl E, Busatto GF, Crespo-Facorro B, Pantelis C, Wood SJ, Zhuo C, Shinohara RT, Gur RC, Gur RE, Koutsouleris N, Wolf DH, Saykin AJ, Ritchie MD, Shen L, Thompson PM, Colliot O, Wittfeld K, Grabe HJ, Tosun D, Bilgel M, An Y, Marcus DS, LaMontagne P, Heckbert SR, Austin TR, Launer LJ, Espeland M, Masters CL, Maruff P, Fripp J, Johnson SC, Morris JC, Albert MS, Bryan RN, Resnick SM, Fan Y, Habes M, Wolk D, Shou H, Davatzikos C (2023) Genomic loci influence patterns of structural covariance in the human brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 120:e2300842120
    Pubmed CrossRef
  16. Geng X, Li G, Lu Z, Gao W, Wang L, Shen D, Zhu H, Gilmore JH (2017) Structural and maturational covariance in early childhood brain development. Cereb Cortex 27:1795-1807
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  17. Oosterwijk CS, Vriend C, Berendse HW, van der Werf YD, van den Heuvel OA (2018) Anxiety in Parkinson's disease is associated with reduced structural covariance of the striatum. J Affect Disord 240:113-120
    Pubmed CrossRef
  18. Cain WS, Gent JF, Goodspeed RB, Leonard G (1988) Evaluation of olfactory dysfunction in the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center. Laryngoscope 98:83-88
    Pubmed CrossRef
  19. Kim DW, Kim JY, Jeon SY (2011) The status of the olfactory cleft may predict postoperative olfactory function in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis. Am J Rhinol Allergy 25:e90-e94
    Pubmed CrossRef
  20. Dale AM, Fischl B, Sereno MI (1999) Cortical surface-based analysis. I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction. Neuroimage 9:179-194
    Pubmed CrossRef
  21. Fischl B, van der Kouwe A, Destrieux C, Halgren E, Ségonne F, Salat DH, Busa E, Seidman LJ, Goldstein J, Kennedy D, Caviness V, Makris N, Rosen B, Dale AM (2004) Automatically parcellating the human cerebral cortex. Cereb Cortex 14:11-22
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Seitz J, Kubicki M, Jacobs EG, Cherkerzian S, Weiss BK, Papadimitriou G, Mouradian P, Buka S, Goldstein JM, Makris N (2019) Impact of sex and reproductive status on memory circuitry structure and function in early midlife using structural covariance analysis. Hum Brain Mapp 40:1221-1233
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  23. Liu Z, Palaniyappan L, Wu X, Zhang K, Du J, Zhao Q, Xie C, Tang Y, Su W, Wei Y, Xue K, Han S, Tsai SJ, Lin CP, Cheng J, Li C, Wang J, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW, Zhang J, Feng J (2021) Resolving heterogeneity in schizophrenia through a novel systems approach to brain structure: individualized structural covariance network analysis. Mol Psychiatry 26:7719-7731
    Pubmed CrossRef
  24. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2002) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. 3rd ed. Routledge, New York, NY
  25. Khundrakpam BS, Lewis JD, Reid A, Karama S, Zhao L, Chouinard-Decorte F, Evans AC; Brain Development Cooperative Group (2017) Imaging structural covariance in the development of intelligence. Neuroimage 144(Pt A):227-240
    Pubmed CrossRef
  26. Genovese CR, Lazar NA, Nichols T (2002) Thresholding of statistical maps in functional neuroimaging using the false discovery rate. Neuroimage 15:870-878
    Pubmed CrossRef
  27. Growdon ME, Schultz AP, Dagley AS, Amariglio RE, Hedden T, Rentz DM, Johnson KA, Sperling RA, Albers MW, Marshall GA (2015) Odor identification and Alzheimer disease biomarkers in clinically normal elderly. Neurology 84:2153-2160
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  28. Dintica CS, Marseglia A, Rizzuto D, Wang R, Seubert J, Arfanakis K, Bennett DA, Xu W (2019) Impaired olfaction is associated with cognitive decline and neurodegeneration in the brain. Neurology 92:e700-e709
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  29. Tian Q, An Y, Kitner-Triolo MH, Davatzikos C, Studenski SA, Ferrucci L, Resnick SM (2023) Associations of olfaction with longitudinal trajectories of brain volumes and neuropsychological function in older adults. Neurology 100:e964-e974
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  30. Gottfried JA (2006) Smell: central nervous processing. In: Taste and smell: an update (Hummel T, Welge-Lüssen A eds), pp 44-69. S.Karger AG, Basel
  31. Witter MP, Doan TP, Jacobsen B, Nilssen ES, Ohara S (2017) Architecture of the entorhinal cortex a review of entorhinal anatomy in rodents with some comparative notes. Front Syst Neurosci 11:46
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  32. Han P, Winkler N, Hummel C, Hähner A, Gerber J, Hummel T (2018) Impaired brain response to odors in patients with varied severity of olfactory loss after traumatic brain injury. J Neurol 265:2322-2332
    Pubmed CrossRef
  33. Doty RL (2019) Treatments for smell and taste disorders: a critical review. Handb Clin Neurol 164:455-479
    Pubmed CrossRef
  34. Glezer I, Bruni-Cardoso A, Schechtman D, Malnic B (2021) Viral infection and smell loss: the case of COVID-19. J Neurochem 157:930-943
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  35. Paz R, Pelletier JG, Bauer EP, ParéD (2006) Emotional enhancement of memory via amygdala-driven facilitation of rhinal interactions. Nat Neurosci 9:1321-1329
    Pubmed CrossRef
  36. Kjelvik G, Evensmoen HR, Brezova V, Håberg AK (2012) The human brain representation of odor identification. J Neurophysiol 108:645-657
    Pubmed CrossRef
  37. Wilson DA, Best AR, Sullivan RM (2004) Plasticity in the olfactory system: lessons for the neurobiology of memory. Neuroscientist 10:513-524
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  38. Mouly AM, Di Scala G (2006) Entorhinal cortex stimulation modulates amygdala and piriform cortex responses to olfactory bulb inputs in the rat. Neuroscience 137:1131-1141
    Pubmed CrossRef
  39. Li Y, Xu J, Liu Y, Zhu J, Liu N, Zeng W, Huang N, Rasch MJ, Jiang H, Gu X, Li X, Luo M, Li C, Teng J, Chen J, Zeng S, Lin L, Zhang X (2017) A distinct entorhinal cortex to hippocampal CA1 direct circuit for olfactory associative learning. Nat Neurosci 20:559-570
    Pubmed CrossRef
  40. Delgado-Lima AH, Bouhaben J, Martínez-Zujeros S, Pallardo-Rodil B, Gómez-Pavón J, Delgado-Losada ML (2023) Could olfactory identification be a prognostic factor in detecting cognitive impairment risk in the elderly?. Geroscience 45:2011-2025
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  41. Royall DR, Chiodo LK, Polk MS, Jaramillo CJ (2002) Severe dysosmia is specifically associated with Alzheimer-like memory deficits in nondemented elderly retirees. Neuroepidemiology 21:68-73
    Pubmed CrossRef
  42. Cristillo V, Pilotto A, Cotti Piccinelli S, Zoppi N, Bonzi G, Gipponi S, Sattin D, Schiavolin S, Raggi A, Bezzi M, Leonardi M, Padovani A; Neuro Covid Next Study Group (2021) Age and subtle cognitive impairment are associated with long-term olfactory dysfunction after COVID-19 infection. J Am Geriatr Soc 69:2778-2780
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  43. Rolls ET (2004) The functions of the orbitofrontal cortex. Brain Cogn 55:11-29
    Pubmed CrossRef
  44. Barbas H (2007) Specialized elements of orbitofrontal cortex in primates. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1121:10-32
    Pubmed CrossRef
  45. Barbas H, Zikopoulos B, Timbie C (2011) Sensory pathways and emotional context for action in primate prefrontal cortex. Biol Psychiatry 69:1133-1139
    Pubmed CrossRef
  46. Stalnaker TA, Cooch NK, Schoenbaum G (2015) What the orbitofrontal cortex does not do. Nat Neurosci 18:620-627
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  47. Fieger A, Röder B, Teder-Sälejärvi W, Hillyard SA, Neville HJ (2006) Auditory spatial tuning in late-onset blindness in humans. J Cogn Neurosci 18:149-157
    Pubmed CrossRef
  48. Battal C, Occelli V, Bertonati G, Falagiarda F, Collignon O (2020) General enhancement of spatial hearing in congenitally blind people. Psychol Sci 31:1129-1139
    Pubmed CrossRef
  49. Bavelier D, Neville HJ (2002) Cross-modal plasticity: where and how?. Nat Rev Neurosci 3:443-452
    Pubmed CrossRef
  50. Merabet LB, Pascual-Leone A (2010) Neural reorganization following sensory loss: the opportunity of change. Nat Rev Neurosci 11:44-52
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  51. Prasad K, Rubin J, Mitra A, Lewis M, Theis N, Muldoon B, Iyengar S, Cape J (2022) Structural covariance networks in schizophrenia: a systematic review part I. Schizophr Res 240:1-21
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef

Print ISSN : 1226-2560

Online ISSN : 2093-8144

© 2019. Experimental Neurobiology: the official journal of the Korean Society for Brain and Neural Sciences & the Korean Society for Neurodegenerative Disease.