What Factors Are Associated With Functional Sensory Recovery Following Lingual Nerve Repair?

被引:21
作者
Fagin, Adam P. [1 ]
Susarla, Srinivas M.
Donoff, Robert B. [1 ]
Kaban, Leonard B. [1 ]
Dodson, Thomas B. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Sch Dent Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Boston, MA 02114 USA
关键词
INFERIOR ALVEOLAR NERVE; MANDIBULAR 3RD MOLARS; MANAGEMENT; REMOVAL; MICROSURGERY; INJURIES; DAMAGE;
D O I
10.1016/j.joms.2012.03.019
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose: To identify factors associated with functional sensory recovery (FSR) after lingual nerve repair. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was composed of subjects who underwent lingual nerve repair from 2004 through 2010. The predictor variables were demographic, anatomic, and operative measurements. The primary outcome measurement was FSR (ie, FSR achieved, yes or no). The secondary outcome measurements were time to FSR and an improvement of at least 2 levels on the British Medical Research Council scale of neurosensory function. Descriptive, bivariate, and multiple logistic regression statistics were computed to identify associations between the predictor variables and FSR. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify associations between the predictors and time to FSR. P <= .05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The sample was composed of 55 subjects with a mean age of 30.7 +/- 11.2 years. The mean duration from injury to repair was 151.6 days (range, 41 to 384 days). Most patients (74.5%) achieved FSR postoperatively, with a mean time to FSR of 262.8 days (median, 208 days). Eighty-six percent of subjects showed an improvement of at least 2 levels on the British Medical Research Council scale. In multiple regression models, younger subjects were more likely to achieve FSR (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.18; P = .02); subjects with better preoperative neurosensory function achieved FSR faster (hazard ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 3.1; P = .01). Conclusion: Most patients undergoing lingual nerve repair achieved FSR. Younger subjects were more likely to achieve FSR. Subjects with better preoperative neurosensory function achieved FSR faster. (c) 2012 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70:2907-2915, 2012
引用
收藏
页码:2907 / 2915
页数:9
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]   Retrospective Review of Microsurgical Repair of 222 Lingual Nerve Injuries [J].
Bagheri, Shahrokh C. ;
Meyer, Roger A. ;
Khan, Husain Ali ;
Kuhmichel, Amy ;
Steed, Martin B. .
JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2010, 68 (04) :715-723
[2]   Lingual Nerve Morbidity and Mandibular Third Molar Surgery: A Prospective Study [J].
Baqain, Zaid H. ;
Abukaraky, Ashraf ;
Hassoneh, Yazan ;
Sawair, Faleh .
MEDICAL PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE, 2010, 19 (01) :28-32
[3]   LINGUAL NERVE DAMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE REMOVAL OF LOWER 3RD MOLARS [J].
BLACKBURN, CW ;
BRAMLEY, PA .
BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL, 1989, 167 (03) :103-107
[4]  
Blondeau F, 2007, J CAN DENT ASSOC, V73, P325
[5]   Recommendations for management of trigeminal nerve defects based on a critical appraisal of the literature [J].
Dodson, TB ;
Kaban, LB .
JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 1997, 55 (12) :1380-1386
[6]   Sensory impairment of the lingual and inferior alveolar nerves following removal of impacted mandibular third molars [J].
Gülicher, D ;
Gerlach, KL .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2001, 30 (04) :306-312
[7]  
Mackinnon S.E., 1988, Surgery of the peripheral nerve
[8]  
MACKINNON SE, 1989, CLIN PLAST SURG, V16, P587
[9]  
Meyer RA, 2001, ORAL MAXILLOFAC SURG, V13, P365
[10]   MICROSURGICAL CORRECTION OF THE INJURED INFERIOR ALVEOLAR NERVE [J].
MOZSARY, PG ;
SYERS, CS .
JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 1985, 43 (05) :353-358