Lingual nerve damage during lower third molar removal: a comparison of two surgical methods

The Comparative Efficacy of Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) With the Combination of Pregabalin and Nortriptyline on Post-extraction Trigeminal Neuropathy by Using Magnetic Resonance (MR) Neurography: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Aim The aim of this randomized clinical trial is to compare the efficacy of palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) with the combination of pregabalin and nortriptyline in treating post-extraction trigeminal neuropathy using magnetic resonance neurography (MRN). Methods The present prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted on 60 patients (20 in each group). In group I (positive control group), a combination of 75 mg of pregabalin and 10 mg of nortriptyline was administered once daily for the duration of 12 weeks. In group II, 600 mg of palmitoylethanolamide was given twice a day. In group III, a combination therapy of the abovementioned drugs was given. The efficacy of the drug was assessed by measuring pain intensity in terms of the numeric rating scale (NRS) (primary outcome) and changes (signal intensity and nerve thickness) in magnetic resonance neurography (secondary outcome) at various intervals of time. The data was collected and subjected to statistical analysis using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25 (IBM SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY) at the significance level of P<0.05. Results A significant decrease in post-drug mean NRS scores was observed in all three groups. In terms of reduction in the mean NRS, the combination group showed the highest reduction. Palmitoylethanolamide significantly reduces pain scores with negligible side effects. Conclusion Palmitoylethanolamide helps in the reduction of mild to moderate pain of painful post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy (PTTN) with minimal side effects, suggesting that it may be used where the use of the conventional drug is either contraindicated or not feasible.

The perception and practice of routine lingual flap retraction in lower third molar surgery among oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Nigeria

Background

Lingual nerve injury is a known complication of mandibular third molar (M3M) surgery, and retraction of the lingual flap is reported to reduce the incidence of this complication. However, there is no global consensus on the routine retraction of lingual flap.

Aim

The aim of the study was to assess the perception and practice of lingual flap retraction amongst oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Nigeria.

Materials and Methods

This cross-sectional national survey was conducted amongst 122 oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Nigeria from January 2023 to March 2023 using a validated, structured, self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire had three sections and 14-item questions. Section A consists of the sociodemographic questions, Section B comprises questions on perception towards lingual flap retraction, whereas Section C consists of questions on the practice of lingual flap retraction. These questionnaires were deployed as an online survey and as hard copies. Both qualitative and quantitative data were analysed. A critical probability level (P < 0.05) was used as the cut-off level for statistical significance.

Results

Most of the participants (47.6%) belong to the age group of 31-40 years. The male-to-female ratio was 6:1. Only 12 (9.8%) participants had a positive perception towards routine lingual flap retractions following M3M surgery. Perception of lingual flap retraction was found not to be associated with the demographic variables of the participants (P > 0.05). A total of 95 participants (77.9%) did not raise nor retract the lingual flap during lower third molar surgery. The rate of practice of lingual flap retraction during third molar surgery was not influenced by any of the factors studied (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The majority of oral and maxillofacial surgeons in Nigeria do not agree that routine retraction of the lingual flap is necessary to reduce lingual nerve injury and majority, too, do not practice this in their management of impacted lower third molar.

Assessment and Correlation of Variation in Lingual Cortical Plate Thickness with Different Angulations of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography in North Indian Population

Purpose

The extraction of impacted mandibular third molar is associated with various types of intraoperative and postoperative complications, one of them is injury to lingual nerve. The present study aims to assess and correlate the variation in lingual cortical plate thickness with different angulations and determine the topographic relationship between the root apex of impacted mandibular third molar and lingual cortical plate using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).

Methods

This prospective cohort study enrolled 140 patients with impacted mandibular third molars who underwent preoperative CBCT imaging. The CBCT images were used to evaluate the outcome variables such as lingual cortical plate thickness and topographical relationship between root apex of impacted mandibular third molar and lingual cortical plate. The predictor variables included age, gender, inclination of third molar, mesiodistal angle, buccolingual angle and lingual plate morphology.

Results

The temporary lingual nerve paresthesia was reported by 1 patient (0.71%) out of 140 patients. The lingual bone in distoangular and vertical impacted third molar was found to be 1.20 times thicker than mesioangular and horizontal teeth. Lingual bone thinning at mid-root level was observed in maximum number of cases with mesioangular teeth (68.5%), whereas horizontal impacted teeth showed lingual bone thinning (90.9%) at root apex level. The mean buccolingual angle of impacted mandibular third molar was found to be significantly associated with lingual bone perforation (p value = 0.0258). The morphology of lingual plate was observed as undercut type (37.14%) followed by slanted (36.43%), parallel (19.29%) and round type (7.14%).

Conclusion

Increase in buccolingual angle of impacted mandibular third molar decreases lingual bone thickness which is the natural barrier for protecting injury to lingual nerve. Also undercut and slanted lingual plate shapes were recognised as risk factors for contact/perforation between root apex and lingual plate. Therefore, proper screening and planning of high risk patients before third molar extraction is crucial.

Lingual Flap Protection during Third Molar Surgery: A Literature Review

The purpose of this review was to analyze how the retraction and protection of lingual flap (LF+) could influence the incidence of lingual nerve injury (LNI) during third molar extraction, as compared with protocols that do not involve handling of lingual tissue (LF). A literature review was performed from the “Medline” and “Scopus” medical databases, using the keywords “lingual nerve” and “third molar surgery.” From the selected articles, the mean values for transitory and permanent LNI’s incidence were elaborated, taking into account the group treated with LF+ technique and the group treated with LF technique. Of 480 articles, 11 studies were included in the review. The LF+ group counted 3,866 surgeries and it resulted in a transitory LNI’s mean incidence of 2.98 ± 0.03% and a mean incidence of 0.1 ± 0.003% for permanent LNI. The LF group counted 5,938 surgeries with, respectively, 1.92 ± 0.02 and 0.49 ± 0.006% of transitory and permanent LNI’s incidence mean values. The results of this study suggest that the application of LF+ techniques reduces the risk of damage and injuries of lingual nerve.

Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth

BACKGROUND

Pathology relating to mandibular wisdom teeth is a frequent presentation to oral and maxillofacial surgeons, and surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth is a common operation. The indications for surgical removal of these teeth are alleviation of local pain, swelling and trismus, and also the prevention of spread of infection that may occasionally threaten life. Surgery is commonly associated with short-term postoperative pain, swelling and trismus. Less frequently, infection, dry socket (alveolar osteitis) and trigeminal nerve injuries may occur. This review focuses on the optimal methods in order to improve patient experience and minimise postoperative morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative benefits and risks of different techniques for surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register (to 8 July 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library; 2019, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 8 July 2019), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 8 July 2019). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing different surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors were involved in assessing the relevance of identified studies, evaluated the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We used risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data in parallel-group trials (or Peto odds ratios if the event rate was low), odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data in cross-over or split-mouth studies, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data. We took into account the pairing of the split-mouth studies in our analyses, and combined parallel-group and split-mouth studies using the generic inverse-variance method. We used the fixed-effect model for three studies or fewer, and random-effects model for more than three studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 62 trials with 4643 participants. Several of the trials excluded individuals who were not in excellent health. We assessed 33 of the studies (53%) as being at high risk of bias and 29 as unclear. We report results for our primary outcomes below. Comparisons of different suturing techniques and of drain versus no drain did not report any of our primary outcomes. No studies provided useable data for any of our primary outcomes in relation to coronectomy. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether envelope or triangular flap designs led to more alveolar osteitis (OR 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 1.23; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.06; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), or permanent altered tongue sensation (Peto OR 4.48, 95% CI 0.07 to 286.49; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). In terms of other adverse effects, two studies reported wound dehiscence at up to 30 days after surgery, but found no difference in risk between interventions. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the use of a lingual retractor affected the risk of permanent altered sensation compared to not using one (Peto OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.00 to 6.82; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). None of our other primary outcomes were reported by studies included in this comparison. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether lingual split with chisel is better than a surgical hand-piece for bone removal in terms of wound infection (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.21; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Alveolar osteitis, permanent altered sensation, and other adverse effects were not reported. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether there is any difference in alveolar osteitis according to irrigation method (mechanical versus manual: RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.09; 1 study) or irrigation volume (high versus low; RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.02; 1 study), or whether there is any difference in postoperative infection according to irrigation method (mechanical versus manual: RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.43; 1 study) or irrigation volume (low versus high; RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.37; 1 study) (all very low-certainty evidence). These studies did not report permanent altered sensation and adverse effects. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether primary or secondary wound closure led to more alveolar osteitis (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.40; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (RR 4.77, 95% CI 0.24 to 96.34; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), or adverse effects (bleeding) (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.47; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). These studies did not report permanent sensation changes. Placing platelet rich plasma (PRP) or platelet rich fibrin (PRF) in sockets may reduce the incidence of alveolar osteitis (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.67; 2 studies), but the evidence is of low certainty. Our other primary outcomes were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this 2020 update, we added 27 new studies to the original 35 in the 2014 review. Unfortunately, even with the addition of these studies, we have been unable to draw many meaningful conclusions. The small number of trials evaluating each comparison and reporting our primary outcomes, along with methodological biases in the included trials, means that the body of evidence for each of the nine comparisons evaluated is of low or very low certainty. Participant populations in the trials may not be representative of the general population, or even the population undergoing third molar surgery. Many trials excluded individuals who were not in good health, and several excluded those with active infection or who had deep impactions of their third molars. Consequently, we are unable to make firm recommendations to surgeons to inform their techniques for removal of mandibular third molars. The evidence is uncertain, though we note that there is some limited evidence that placing PRP or PRF in sockets may reduce the incidence of dry socket. The evidence provided in this review may be used as a guide for surgeons when selecting and refining their surgical techniques. Ongoing studies may allow us to provide more definitive conclusions in the future.

Nerve Injury After Surgical Excision of Mandibular Third Molars Under Local Anesthesia: An Audit

Background

Injury of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) sustained during surgical removal of an impacted lower third molar may cause paresthesia of the lower lip, chin, lower gingivae and anterior teeth. Lingual nerve (LN) injuries may result in ipsilateral paresthesia of the anterior two thirds of the tongue, mucosa of floor of mouth and lingual gingivae. A close anatomic relationship between the roots of the third molar and mandibular canal places the IAN at risk of damage.

Purpose

The primary aim of this retrospective audit was to ascertain the incidence of IAN and LN damage after mandibular third molar surgery in National Dental Centre Singapore. A secondary aim was to identify the contributory factors for the risk of IAN and LN nerve injury on the basis of the data collected.

Methods

This retrospective audit included 1276 mandibular third molar surgical removals performed in the local anesthesia operating theatre (LAOT) at the National Dental Centre Singapore (NDCS) from April to December 2013. Data included patient details, clinical characteristics, and 1 week postoperative presence/absence of sensory alteration as reported by the patient.

Results

Summary of results- Out of 1276 third molar sites audited, 8 (0.62%) sites had altered sensation of the IAN and 1 (0.078%) had altered sensation of the LN at 1 week postoperative review.

Conclusion

The incidence of IAN injury (0.62%) and lingual Nerve injury (0.08%) after one week from surgery in our audit was low compared to similar studies. This retrospective audit did not show any correlation of nerve injury to age, gender, race, site, angulation of tooth, grade of operator, removal of bone or tooth division. There was no single radiological sign associated with paresthesia, although the most common radiological signs were interruption of the canal line and darkening of the roots.

Prevention of neurological injuries during mandibular third molar surgery: technical notes

Surgery to the mandibular third molar is common, and injuries to the inferior alveolar nerve and the lingual nerve are well-recognized complications of this procedure. The aim of these technical notes is to describe operative measures for reducing neurological complications during mandibular third molar surgery. The following procedure should be used to prevent damage to the inferior alveolar nerve: a well-designed mucoperiosteal flap, to obtain appropriate access to the surgical area; a conservative ostectomy on the distal and distal-lingual side; tooth sectioning, to facilitate its removal by decreasing the retention zones; tooth dislocation in the path of withdrawal imposed by the curvature of the root apex; and careful socket debridement, when the roots of the extracted tooth are in intimate contact with the mandibular canal. To prevent injury to the lingual nerve, it is important (I) to assess the integrity of the mandibular inner cortex and exclude the presence of fenestration, which could cause the dislocation of the tooth or its fragment into the sublingual or submandibular space; (II) to avoid inappropriate or excessive dislocation proceedings, in order to prevent lingual cortex fracture; (III) to perform horizontal mesial-distal crown sectioning of the lingually inclined tooth; (IV) to protect the lingual flap with a retractor showing the cortical ridge; and (V) to pass the suture not too apically and from the inner side in a buccal-lingual direction in the retromolar area.

The effect of modified surgical flap design for removal of lower third molars on lingual nerve injury

AIM

The objective of this study was to evaluate a modified flap design for removal of lower third molars with avoidance of lingual flap elevation and its effect on postsurgical lingual nerve sensory impairment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The patients included in this prospective study were those referred for removal of symptomatic lower third molars at two Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery clinics. Different patterns of impaction were included regarding the angulation and depth of the lower third molar. Patients were reviewed 1 day after surgery, then after 1 week. Each patient was examined at each recall visit for any sensory alterations of the lingual nerve. The data collected was correlated to several variables including the age, gender, side of operation, state of eruption, angulation, depth of impaction, and tooth division.

RESULTS

A number of 53 patients (23 males and 30 females), at ages ranging from 16 to 43 years, underwent surgical removal of 66 fully or partially impacted lower third molars under local anesthesia using a modified flap design. The modified flap design provided adequate exposure for removal of the lower third molar for all patterns of impactions included, regarding the state of eruption, angulation, and depth of the tooth.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that the investigated flap design can be safely used to remove lower third molars for different patterns of impaction without jeopardizing the lingual tissues thus providing optimum protection for the lingual nerve since it provided adequate exposure to remove the tooth without the reflection of a lingual flap.

Variation in Lingual Nerve Course: A Human Cadaveric Study

The lingual nerve is a terminal branch of the mandibular nerve. It is varied in its course and in its relationship to the mandibular alveolar crest, submandibular duct and also the related muscles in the floor of the mouth. This study aims to understand the course of the lingual nerve from the molar area until its insertion into the tongue muscle. This cadaveric research involved the study of 14 hemi-mandibles and consisted of two parts: (i) obtaining morphometrical measurements of the lingual nerve to three landmarks on the alveolar ridge, and (b) understanding non-metrical or morphological appearance of its terminal branches inserting in the ventral surface of the tongue. The mean distance between the fourteen lingual nerves and the alveolar ridge was 12.36 mm, and they were located 12.03 mm from the lower border of the mandible. These distances were varied when near the first molar (M1), second molar (M2) and third molar (M3). The lingual nerve coursed on the floor of the mouth for approximately 25.43 mm before it deviated toward the tongue anywhere between the mesial of M1 and distal of M2. Thirteen lingual nerves were found to loop around the submandibular duct for an average distance of 6.92 mm (95% CI: 5.24 to 8.60 mm). Their looping occurred anywhere between the M2 and M3. In 76.9% of the cases the loop started around the M3 region and the majority (69.2%) of these looping ended at between the first and second molars and at the lingual developmental groove of the second molar. It gave out as many as 4 branches at its terminal end at the ventral surface of the tongue, with the presence of 2 branches being the most common pattern. An awareness of the variations of the lingual nerve is important to prevent any untoward complications or nerve injury and it is hoped that these findings will be useful for planning of surgical procedures related to the alveolar crest, submandibular gland/ duct and surrounding areas.

Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth

BACKGROUND

The surgical removal of mandibular wisdom teeth is one of the most common operations undertaken in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The most common indication for surgery is infection about a partially erupted tooth that is impacted against bone or soft tissues. Other indications include unrestorable caries, pulpal and periapical pathology, fracture of the tooth and cyst development, amongst others. Most commonly the benefits of surgical removal of a wisdom tooth include alleviation of the symptoms and signs of pericoronitis and its potential consequences. However, surgery is frequently associated with postoperative pain, swelling and trismus. Less commonly complications include infection, including dry socket, trigeminal nerve injuries and rarely fracture of the mandible.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative benefits and risks of different techniques for undertaking various aspects or stages of the surgical extraction of mandibular wisdom teeth.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 21 March 2014), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to 21 March 2014) and EMBASE (OVID) (1980 to 21 March 2014). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication in the electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing surgical techniques for removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors conducted assessment of relevance, risk of bias and data extraction. Study authors were contacted for additional information. RRs were used for dichotomous data and MDs for continuous data, unless the event rate was very low and Peto ORs were used. The pairing of the split-mouth studies was taken into account in the analysis for both dichotomous and continuous outcomes, and parallel group and split-mouth studies were combined using the generic inverse variance method. Random-effects models were used provided there were more than three studies (fixed-effect models otherwise).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 35 trials (2569 patients) were included. The interventions under consideration fell into seven broad categories, with many comparisons including only a small number of trials. Twenty-one of the trials were assessed at high risk of bias, the remaining 14 as unclear. The results are described in the summary of findings tables.Triangular flaps were associated with a 71% reduction in alveolar osteitis at one week (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.78; three trials, moderate quality) and reduction in pain at 24 hours (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.10; two trials, moderate quality) compared with envelope flaps. There was no evidence of a difference in overall infection rates, in maximum mouth opening or in permanent sensation. However, there was some evidence that residual swelling after one week was slightly increased in the triangular flap groups compared to envelope flap types (MD 0.66 mm, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.07; two trials, low quality). We found no data on temporary sensation, or adverse events.There was low quality evidence from two studies, looking at the use of a retractor during third molar surgery, to indicate more cases of temporary altered sensation (up to one month) when a retractor was used (Peto OR 5.19, 95% CI 1.38 to 19.49; two trials, low quality). One study reported that this did not persist for more than six months in either group. We found no data for use of a retractor on other primary outcomes or adverse effects (including fracture of the mandible).Due to the small number of studies, the different comparisons evaluated, the variable outcomes reported and the paucity of useful data for all primary outcomes we were not able to draw any conclusions concerning bone removal in third molar surgery.There was insufficient evidence from single studies of very low quality on irrigation method (manual versus mechanical) or irrigation volume (low or high) to determine whether there were differences or not for the outcomes of alveolar osteitis or postoperative infection. We found no data for any of the other primary outcomes.There was insufficient evidence (low to very low quality) that any wound closure technique (primary versus secondary) was superior to another for the outcomes of alveolar osteitis, postoperative infection or maximum mouth opening achieved after seven days, or reactionary bleeding. There was evidence that secondary wound closure was associated with reduced pain at 24 hours (MD 0.79, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.24; four trials, moderate quality) and slightly reduced swelling after one week (MD 0.33, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.57; seven trials, moderate quality).We found no data on other primary outcomes.There was some evidence that the use of a surgical drain was associated with less postoperative swelling (MD -0.90, 95% CI -1.62 to -0.19; five trials, moderate quality) and greater maximum mouth opening one week after surgery (MD 3.72 mm, 95% CI 2.84 to 4.59; two trials, moderate quality). There was insufficient evidence from a single study (low quality) to determine whether the presence of a drain made any difference to pain at 24 hours postoperation. There were no data for the other primary outcomes.Although two RCTs compared coronectomy with complete extraction, flaws in the design and the unit of analysis of these studies meant that there were no reliable data available for inclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The thirty-five included trials looked at a range of different surgical techniques. The comparisons related to seven broad aspects of the surgical procedures for impacted mandibular third molars: type of surgical flap raised, use of retractors, techniques for bone removal, wound irrigation, wound closure, wound drainage, and complete/incomplete tooth removal. The quality of the body of evidence for each of these comparisons was very low to moderate due to the small number of trials and patients, and the majority of the trials being at high risk of bias (65%) with the remainder at unclear risk of bias.The evidence for making changes to surgical practice is therefore limited. However, it is useful to describe the state of the research evidence supporting practice so that surgeons can make an informed choice in adopting new techniques, or continuing with established techniques.

Anatomical relationship of lingual nerve to the region of mandibular third molar

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the relationship of the lingual nerve with the adjacent anatomical structures of the mandibular third molar region, influencing the dentist to be aware of the variability of these relationships.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Samples of 24 human corpse half-heads were selected and divided according with the presence or absence of the mandibular third molars. The lingual nerve (LN) was explored, showing its run from the oblique line until its crossing with the submandibular gland duct. The measurements along the LN and the adjacent anatomical structures were taken at the retromolar, molar and sublingual region with the use of a digital caliper.

RESULTS

The distance from the LN and the third molar socket, which represents the horizontal distance of the lingual plate to the nerve, on average, was 4.4 mm (SD 2.4 mm). The distance from the LN and the lingual alveolar rim, which represents the vertical relationship between the nerve and the lingual alveolar rim of the third molar socket, on average, was 16.8 mm (SD 5.7 mm). The LN has a varied topography that leaves it very vulnerable during any procedure executed in this region.

CONCLUSIONS

Unless adequate protection of the lingual nerve is acquired by following an adequate surgical technique, the lingual nerve will always be vulnerable to damage during surgical intervention or manipulation in this region.

Clinical anatomy of the lingual nerve and identification with ultrasonography

Our objective was to investigate the pathway of the lingual nerve and find out whether it can be identified using ultrasonography (US) intraorally. It is a dominant sensory nerve that branches from the posterior division of the mandibular aspect of the trigeminal nerve, and is one of the two most injured nerves during oral surgery. Its anatomy in the region of the third molar has been associated with lingual nerves of variable morphology. If surgeons can identify its precise location using US, morbidity should decrease. We searched published anatomical and specialty texts, journals, and websites for reference to its site and US. Cadavers (28 nerves) were dissected to analyse its orientation at the superior lingual alveolar crest (or lingual shelf). Volunteers (140 nerves) had US scans to identify the nerve intraorally. Our search of published books and journals found that descriptions of the nerve along the superior lingual alveolar crest were inadequate. We found no US studies of the nerve in humans. Dissections showed that the nerve was above (n=6, 21%) and below (n=22, 79%) the crest of the lingual plate. US scans showed 140 lingual nerves intraorally in 70 volunteers. The nerve lay either above or below the superior lingual alveolar crest, which led us to develop a high/low classification system. US can identify the lingual nerve and help to classify it preoperatively to avoid injury. Our results suggest that clinical anatomy of the lingual nerve includes the superior lingual alveolar crest at the third and second molars because of its surgical importance. US scans can successfully identify the nerve intraorally preoperatively.

Lingual nerve deficit following mandibular third molar removal: review of the literature and medicolegal considerations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;113:e10-e18. [PMID: 22669152 DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.06.034]

The removal of mandibular third molars is probably the most frequently performed procedure in oral and maxillofacial surgery, and it is the most common surgical procedure associated with lingual nerve deficit. Lingual sensory impairment remains a clinical problem in oral and maxillofacial surgery and has serious medical and legal implications. In fact, damage to the lingual nerve is a common cause of litigation in dentistry. The purpose of this article was to review the literature about lingual nerve deficit following mandibular third molar removal and discuss the associated medicolegal aspects.

Factors influencing lingual nerve paraesthesia following third molar surgery: a prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this prospective study was to evaluate the incidence and various risk factors influencing the sensory deficit in case of lingual nerve injury (LNI) in individuals whose impacted mandibular third molars are surgically removed under local anesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was based on the data collected prospectively from a random group of 100 patients who underwent surgical removal of bony impacted lower third molar in a dental hospital. Details of the patient, reason for extraction, type of impaction, method of surgery and signs and symptoms of nerve injury are recorded. Neurosensory testing was done to evaluate the LNI at 1 week, 1 months, 3 months and 6 months interval. Comparison was carried out using Chi square test. For all tests a P < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

The incidence of LNI was 4 % and of temporary in nature which recovered well within 6 months postoperatively. The age of the patient above 26 years, lingual flap retraction, depth of impaction (red line ≥10 mm) and duration of surgery above 30 min were the significant factors for causing LNI.

CONCLUSIONS

The age of the patient, depth of impaction, lingual flap retraction and longer duration of surgery are significant risk factors for LNI during mandibular third molar surgery. Greater care should be taken to avoid the morbidity and patients should be informed well ahead about the probable complications.

Necessity of 3D visualization for the removal of lower wisdom teeth: required sample size to prove non-inferiority of panoramic radiography compared to CBCT. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16:699-706. [PMID: 21519882 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-011-0553-8]

The availability of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and the numbers of CBCT scans rise constantly, increasing the radiation burden to the patient. A growing discussion is noticeable if a CBCT scan prior to the surgical removal of wisdom teeth may be indicated. We aimed to confirm non-inferiority with respect to damage of the inferior alveolar nerve in patients diagnosed by panoramic radiography compared to CBCT in a prospective randomized controlled multicentre trial. Sample size (number of required third molar removals) was calculated for the study and control groups as 183,474 comparing temporary and 649,036 comparing permanent neurosensory disturbances of the inferior alveolar nerve. Modifying parameter values resulted in sample sizes ranging from 39,584 to 245,724 respectively 140,024 to 869,250. To conduct a clinical study to prove a potential benefit from CBCT scans prior to surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth with respect to the most important parameter, i.e., nerval damage, is almost impossible due to the very large sample sizes required. This fact vice versa indicates that CBCT scans should only be performed in high risk wisdom tooth removals.

Risk factors of neurosensory deficits in lower third molar surgery: an literature review of prospective studies

This literature review assessed the risk factors linked to inferior dental nerve (IDN) and lingual nerve (LN) deficits following lower wisdom tooth surgery. A computer search of several databases with specified key words was performed. 32 articles were selected; the risk factors for IDN deficit were reported in 4 articles, LN in 9 and both IDN and LN in 19. Data were analysed statistically to evaluate the potential risk factors. Literature review showed specific radiographic signs and intra-operative IDN exposure increased the risk of IDN deficit. Raising the lingual flap significantly increased the risk of LN deficit. Unerupted tooth and lingual split technique increased IDN and LN deficit risks significantly. Age was linked to IDN and LN deficits, and deep impaction was related to IDN deficit, but no statistical tests were performed on these two risk factors owing to the heterogeneity of data from the studies. This literature review found increased age, unerupted tooth, deep impaction, specific radiographic signs, intra-operative IDN exposure and lingual split technique were risk factors for IDN deficit; increased age, unerupted tooth, distal impaction, raising of lingual flap and lingual split technique were risks factors for LN deficit in lower wisdom tooth surgery.

Risk factors associated with injury to the inferior alveolar and lingual nerves following third molar surgery-revisited

OBJECTIVE

Earlier reports, including a preliminary study within our unit, have shown that the surgeon's experience is one of the most influential factors in determining the likelihood of both permanent inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) and lingual nerve (LN) paresthesia, following third molar surgery. The effect of this and other factors influencing such prevalence are assessed in this study.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective study involved 3236 patients who underwent surgical removal of impacted third molars. Patients' demographics and radiological parameters were recorded along with the grade of the treating surgeon. The prevalence of inferior alveolar and lingual nerves paresthesia at 1 month, 6 months, and 18 to 24 months postoperatively were also traced.

RESULTS

At 1 month postoperatively, the incidence of IAN paresthesia was 1.5% and the LN was 1.8%. These figures decreased over time and 18 to 24 months postoperatively, the incidence of permanent dysfunction of the IAN was 0.6% and LN was 1.1%. With regard to inferior alveolar nerve paresthesia, risk factors included the patient's age (26-30 years), horizontally impacted teeth, close radiographic proximity to the inferior alveolar canal (IAC), and treatment by trainee surgeons. With regard to the lingual nerve, risk factors included male patients, distoangular impactions, close radiographic proximity to the IAC, and treatment by trainee surgeons.

CONCLUSION

One of the main risk factors of developing permanent sensory dysfunction in the distribution of these nerves is related to the surgical skills/experience of the operator. Other factors are associated with the type of impaction and the radiographic proximity of the tooth to the inferior alveolar nerve. Such long-term complications can affect the patient's quality of life; the impact on profession, education, and research is unknown.

Incidence of neurosensory deficits and recovery after lower third molar surgery: a prospective clinical study of 4338 cases

A prospective study of all lower third molar surgery performed in the outpatient extraction clinic of a teaching dental hospital was conducted from January 1998 through October 2005 to determine the incidence of subsequent neurosensory deficit due to inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) and lingual nerve (LN) injury, to examine possible contributing risk factors and to describe the pattern of recovery. 3595 patients were included (61% female, 39% male; age range, 14-82 years). Of the 4338 lower third molar extractions performed by various grades of operators, 0.35% developed IAN deficit and 0.69% developed LN deficit. Distoangular impaction was found to increase the risk of LN deficit significantly (p<0.001). Depth of impaction was related to the risk of IAN deficit (p<0.001). Undergraduates caused more LN deficits (p<0.001). Sex, age, raising of a lingual flap, protection of LN with a retractor, removal of distolingual cortex, tooth sectioning and difficulty in tooth elevation were not significantly related to IAN or LN injury. Postoperative recovery from IAN and LN deficits was noted most significantly at 3 and 6 months, respectively. By the end of the follow-up period, 67% of IAN deficits and 72% of LN deficits had recovered completely.

General technique of third molar removal

The most commonly performed surgical procedure in most oral and maxillofacial surgery practices is the removal of impacted third molars. Extensive training, skill, and experience allow this procedure to be performed in an atraumatic fashion with local anesthesia, sedation, or general anesthesia. The decision to remove symptomatic third molars is not usually difficult, but the decision to remove asymptomatic third molars is sometimes less clear and requires clinical experience. A wide body of literature (discussed elsewhere in this issue) attempts to establish clinical practice guidelines for dealing with impacted teeth. Data is beginning to accumulate from third molar studies, which hopefully will provide surgeons and their patients with evidence-based guidelines regarding elective third molar surgery.

Lingual nerve injury in third molar surgery

The aim of this study was to investigate the healing potential of damaged lingual nerves with some remaining function at least 3 months post injury. Forty-six patients were monitored at different time intervals after injury. A simple neurosensory examination included the perception of tactile, thermal stimuli and location of stimulus, as well as two-point discrimination, pain and the presence of a neuroma at the lesion site. Neurogenic signs and symptoms related to the injury and their variation over time were registered. Females were more often referred than males. Most lingual nerve injuries exhibited a significant potential for recovery, but only a few patients made a full recovery with absence of neurogenic symptoms. The recovery rate was highest during the first 6 months. Recovery was not influenced by gender, and only slightly by age. The presence of a neuroma was associated with a more severe injury. Patients should be monitored repeatedly for at least 3 months, and not operated on until neurosensory function no longer improves, and is less than what might be rendered by microsurgical repair. Through proper training and mastery of the surgical approach, every effort should be focused on sparing the lingual nerve, considering its proximity to the field of surgery.

Clinical characteristics of trigeminal nerve injury referrals to a university centre

The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the aetiology and characteristics of trigeminal nerve injuries referred to a university centre with nerve injury care. Fifty-nine patients with 73 injured trigeminal nerves were referred in 10 months. The most common aetiologies were odontectomy (third molar surgery) (52.1% of nerves), local anaesthetic (LA) injections (12.3%), orthognathic surgery (12.3%) and implant surgery (11.0%). The inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) was most commonly injured nerve (64.4%), followed by the lingual nerve (LN) (28.8%). About a quarter of IAN injuries (27.3%) and half of LN injuries (57.1%) from odontectomy had severe sensory impairment. There were twice as many LN than IAN injuries from local anaesthetic injections, but all had mild or no sensory impairment. Nerve injuries from implant surgery occurred only in IAN injuries; none had severe sensory impairment. Neuropathic pain occurred in 14.9% of IAN injuries and only in those with mild or no sensory impairment. Nerve surgery was offered to 45.8% of patients; a third underwent surgery.

Management of neuropathic orofacial pain

Current management of painful trigeminal neuropathies relies on pharmacological (topical and systemic), surgical, and complementary modalities. There is, however, a lack of quality research relating to the effectiveness of these modalities. In this review we analyze the available data that relates to the therapy of trigeminal neuralgia, postherpetic neuralgia, and posttraumatic neuropathies and provide clinical guidelines. The review focuses on medical management, as well as surgical and other interventions for painful neuropathies.

Iatrogenic injury to oral branches of the trigeminal nerve: records of 449 cases

The aims of this study were threefold: (1) to describe iatrogenic lesions to oral branches of the trigeminal nerve, signs and symptoms, and functional status, (2) to report on a simple neurosensory examination method, and (3) to discuss means of prevention of iatrogenic injury. The etiology and functional status of 449 injuries to oral branches collected over 18 years were retrospectively reviewed. A simple scheme of a clinical neurosensory examination was applied to enable a quantified rating of the perception. Injury to the lingual nerve (n = 261) is not only the most prevalent type of lesion, it also seems to be the most devastating type of lesion. Third molar surgery (n = 319) counts for the majority of injuries to the lingual, inferior alveolar, and buccal nerves. Lesions related to the injection of local analgesics was the second most frequent etiology (n = 78), and the lingual nerve was affected more frequently and severely than other oral branches of the trigeminal nerve. The female gender was overrepresented in incidence of injured nerves but no difference was found in the severity of affection between females and males. All grades of loss of neurosensory functions were found, and a range of neurogenic malfunctions was reported. Methodological obstacles in clinical neurosensory examination of trigeminal nerve injury and the magnitude of neurosensory impairment are discussed. Many nerve injuries are avoidable by critical reevaluation of indications, increased awareness of potential hazards, and modified surgical procedures.

Removal of third molars in Scottish oral and maxillofacial surgery units: A review of practice in 1995 and 2002

We audited the practice of removal of third molars in Scottish oral and maxillofacial (OMFS) units in 1995 and in 2002. We collected data from anonymous structured postal questionnaires from 12 Scottish OMFS units about patients referred for removal of third molars in 1995 and 11 units in 2002. The percentage of patients who had no treatment increased from 11% in 1995 (102/928) to 16% in 2002 (66/412). The incidence of prophylactic removal of third molars decreased between the two periods. Removal of third molars under local anaesthesia with or without sedation increased from 35% (325/928) in 1995 to 54% (223/412) in 2002. Removal of third molars under general anaesthesia decreased from 54% in 1995 to 30% in 2002.

Simplifying the assessment of the recovery from surgical injury to the lingual nerve

OBJECTIVE

To determine the sensitivity of conventional sensory assessment in monitoring lingual nerve recovery subsequent to third molar surgery and to evaluate if the assessment methods can be predictive of injury outcome.

METHOD

A prospective case series of 94 patients presenting with lingual nerve injuries evaluated using objective mechanosensory and subjective methods during the recovery period of up to 12 months.

RESULTS

The conventional tests were often unable to diagnose the presence of injury due to variability and they were not predictive of outcome. As a result of this study, we are able to identify patients more likely to have permanent rather than temporary lingual nerve injury at four to eight weeks post injury, using patient reported subjective function. The subjective function test also minimises the requirements for specialist training or equipment providing an ideal method for general dental practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of these simple subjective tests may enable us to identify which patients are at risk of permanent lingual nerve injuries in the early post injury phase, thus allowing expeditious therapy when indicated.

Lingual Nerve Damage After Mandibular Third Molar Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to clinically evaluate the frequency, type, and risk factors for lingual nerve damage after mandibular third molar surgery with reference to lingual flap retraction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of fifty-five patients referred for bilateral mandibular third molar removal were included in this study. Each patient was randomly allotted to have the procedure performed on 1 side (experimental group) with lingual flap retraction. On the opposite side (control group), the same procedure was performed without lingual flap retraction.

RESULTS

Lingual nerve damage occurred in 9.1% in the experimental group in which lingual flap retraction was performed. In the control group, damage to the lingual nerve was not observed. The difference was statistically significant (P <.001) as measured by the Cochran test.

CONCLUSION

Lingual nerve retraction represented a risk factor to temporary lingual nerve damage during mandibular third molar surgery.

The effect of carbamazepine on injury-induced ectopic discharge in the lingual nerve

Previous studies have shown that the development of ectopic activity from damaged axons following nerve injury may contribute to the aetiology of sensory disturbances, including dysaesthesia. Pharmacological manipulation of this activity could provide a method of treatment for this intractable condition. In this study we have investigated the effect of carbamazepine, an anti-convulsant, as it is known to have membrane stabilising properties. In eight anaesthetised adult ferrets the left lingual nerve was sectioned and the animals allowed to recover for 3 days. Then, in terminal experiments under general anaesthesia, the nerve was re-exposed and electrophysiological recordings were made from spontaneously active units in fine filaments dissected from the nerve proximal to the injury site. Carbamazepine in a modified cyclodextrin (hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin) was administered intravenously in increments, in order to achieve a progressively increasing systemic concentration, and serum levels were determined at the point that activity ceased. Twenty-one spontaneously active units were studied, with conduction velocities of 2.1-28.9 m s(-1) and discharge frequencies of 0.25-15.3 Hz. Spontaneous activity ceased in 13 units with a serum concentration of carbamazepine ranging from 3.5 to 8.4 mg/l, which was within the normal therapeutic range (4-12 mg/l). Four units ceased activity with carbamazepine levels above the therapeutic range (15.4-17.2 mg/ml), but the remaining four continued to discharge throughout the recording period. These data suggest that systemic carbamazepine can reduce the level of spontaneous activity initiated in some axons following lingual nerve injury.

The effect of triamcinolone hexacetonide on the spontaneous and mechanically-induced ectopic discharge following lingual nerve injury in the ferret

Investigations into the aetiology of nerve injury-induced dysaesthesia have revealed the development of spontaneous and mechanically-induced activity from damaged axons. Pharmacological manipulation of this activity could provide a method of treatment for this intractable condition. This study has investigated the effect of a corticosteroid applied to the injury site, as these agents are known to reduce inflammation and scarring. In 24 anaesthetised adult ferrets the left lingual nerve was sectioned and the animals allowed to recover. In eight of these animals the nerve was re-exposed under anaesthesia after 1 month and 100 microl of corticosteroid (triamcinolone hexacetonide, 20 mg/ml) was injected into and around the injury site. In eight others, 100 microl of the steroid carrier was injected, and the eight remaining animals were used as controls. In terminal experiments under general anaesthesia, 3 months after the initial injury, electrophysiological recordings were made from axons in fine filaments dissected from the nerve central to both the injury site and junction with the chorda tympani nerve. Spontaneous activity (SA) was found in approximately 13% of units in control animals, 12% following the application of steroid, and 14% in the carrier group. Mechanically-induced activity at the injury site was found in approximately 13% of units in controls, significantly fewer after the application of steroid 4% (P<0.001) and 12% in the carrier group. These data suggest that local application of the corticosteroid triamcinolone hexacetonide could reduce the level of mechanically-induced, but not spontaneous, dysaesthesia following lingual nerve injury.

Lingual flap retraction for third molar removal

PURPOSE

Lingual nerve damage following lower third molar surgery remains a clinical problem. The traditional approach in the United States has been a buccal approach avoiding exposure or surgery on the lingual side of the crest of the ridge. An alternative technique is to deliberately expose the lingual tissues and retract the lingual nerve lingually before tooth removal. This study reports a trial of this technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients had removal of their lower third molars carried out using a technique that raises a lingual flap in addition to a buccal flap and places a specially designed lingual retractor to ensure that the lingual nerve is held out of the surgical field. This technique was used in cases where the crown of the tooth had to be sectioned or when distal bone needed to be removed.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty patients were treated by this method. There were 4 cases of transient lingual paresthesia, presumably caused by traction pressure from the retractor. Three of these cases were mild and resolved within 3 weeks. The fourth case had more profound paresthesia, but still resolved within 2 months. There were no cases of permanent nerve damage, and in many cases removal of the third molar was simplified by the superior access.

CONCLUSION

Lingual retraction for third molar removal improves access to the surgical site and can simplify third molar removal. In this prospective study there were no cases of permanent lingual nerve injury.

Current management of damage to the inferior alveolar and lingual nerves as a result of removal of third molars

In this review we present algorithms to guide the clinical management of patients who sustain damage to the inferior alveolar or lingual nerves during the removal of lower third molars. Monitoring recovery using simple sensory testing allows those patients who may benefit from some form of intervention to be identified. There is good evidence that some surgical procedures produce worthwhile improvements in sensation but management of nerve injury-induced dysaesthesia remains problematic.