Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

  • 제37권5호
  • /
  • Pages.355-364
  • /
  • 2011
  • /
  • 2234-7550(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-5930(eISSN)
대한구강악안면외과학회 (The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

설신경 손상 환자의 회복에 대한 후향적 연구

Recovery of lingual nerve injury: retrospective observational study

  • 홍동환 (서울대학교 치의학전문대학원 치의학과) ;
  • 임호경 (서울대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 김성민 (서울대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 김명진 (서울대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 이종호 (서울대학교 치과대학 구강악안면외과학교실)
  • Hong, Dong-Hwan (Department of Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lim, Ho-Kyung (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Soung-Min (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Myung-Jin (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Jong-Ho (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • 투고 : 2011.04.16
  • 심사 : 2011.09.29
  • 발행 : 2011.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Introduction: This study evaluated nerve recovery through retrospective study of patients with lingual nerve damage. Patients and Methods: The patients who visited Seoul National University Dental Hospital for an injury to the lingual nerve from April 1988 to August 2009 were enrolled in this study (n=41). The relevance of various factors including the causes of damage, age, etc. was analyzed by the subjective improvement based upon questionnaires and the clinical records. The evaluation variants were a subjective assessment and neurosensory examination composed of the direction, contact threshold, two-point discrimination, pin prick, thermal discrimination and current perception threshold. Results: The causes of lingual nerve damage were an extraction of the lower third molar (75.6%), local anesthesia (9.7%), incision and drainage (4.88%), trauma (2.44%). The evaluation of subjective prognosis exhibited no difference in sensory improvement depending on the cause, age and gender. Based upon the subjective evaluation, 44.7% of patients showed sensory improvement. The first hospital visit from injury was shorter in the group showing subjective improvement (3.41 months) than those showing no improvement (5.24 months) (P=0.301). Thirty six out of 41 patients were treated with only conservative therapy and 5 patients were treated by surgical intervention. Neurosensory examinations revealed improvement, although not statistically significant, and the degree was higher in the subjectively improved group. The contact threshold discrimination showed the highest correlation with subjective improvement (P=0.069). Most of the sensory recovery was gained within 12 months and the degree of improvement at the tip of the tongue was higher than that of the dorsum (P<0.001). Conclusion: The damaged lingual nerve improved at a rate of 44.7% and mostly within 12 months after the incident. There was no difference between the subjective prognosis and neurosensory examination depending on the cause of damage, age and gender, whereas the contact threshold discrimination was the best variant that reflected the subjective prognosis statistically.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Fielding AF, Rachiele DP, Frazier G. Lingual nerve paresthesia following third molar surgery: a retrospective clinical study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1997;84:345-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(97)90029-9
  2. Blackburn CW, Bramley PA. Lingual nerve damage associated with the removal of lower third molars. Br Dent J 1989;167:103- 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4806922
  3. Black CG. Sensory impairment following lower third molar surgery: a prospective study in New Zealand. N Z Dent J 1997; 93:68-71.
  4. Wofford DT, Miller RI. Prospective study of dysesthesia following odontectomy of impacted mandibular third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1987;45:15-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(87)90080-2
  5. Krafft TC, Hickel R. Clinical investigation into the incidence of direct damage to the lingual nerve caused by local anaesthesia. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1994;22:294-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-5182(05)80079-4
  6. Karas ND, Boyd SB, Sinn DP. Recovery of neurosensory function following orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:124-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(10)80199-5
  7. Chiapasco MDe Cicco L, Marrone G. Side effects and complications associated with third molar surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;76:412-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(93)90005-O
  8. Middlehurst RJ, Barker GR, Rood JP. Postoperative morbidity with mandibular third molar surgery: a comparison of two techniques. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;46:474-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(88)90415-6
  9. Carmichael FA, McGowan DA. Incidence of nerve damage following third molar removal: a West of Scotland Oral Surgery Research Group study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1992;30:78-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-4356(92)90074-S
  10. Han S. National survey of inferior alveolar nerve and lingual nerve damage after lower third molar extraction. J Korean Dent Assoc 2009;47:211-24.
  11. Mason DA. Lingual nerve damage following lower third molar surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;17:290-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(88)80005-5
  12. Hillerup S, Stoltze K. Lingual nerve injury in third molar surgery I. Observations on recovery of sensation with spontaneous healing. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;36:884-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2007.06.004
  13. Lee JH, Lee SY, Song SI, Lee EJ, Ahn KM, Kim SM, et al. Sensory normative values of lower lip and tongue for evaluation of inferior alveolar or lingual nerve damage. J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;25:114-22.
  14. Sunderland S. A classification of peripheral nerve injuries producing loss of function. Brain 1951;74:491-516. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/74.4.491
  15. Robinson PP, Loescher AR, Smith KG. A prospective, quantitative study on the clinical outcome of lingual nerve repair. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;38:255-63. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjom.2000.0463
  16. Rath EM, Essick GK. Perioral somesthetic sensibility: do the skin of the lower face and the midface exhibit comparable sensitivity? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:1181-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(90)90534-9
  17. Pogrel MA, Thamby S. Permanent nerve involvement resulting from inferior alveolar nerve blocks. J Am Dent Assoc 2000;131: 901-7. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0308
  18. Venta¨ I, Lindqvist C, Ylipaavalniemi P. Malpractice claims for permanent nerve injuries related to third molar removals. Acta Odontol Scand 1998;56:193-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016359850142772
  19. Hillerup S, Hj..rting-Hansen E, Reumert T. Repair of the lingual nerve after iatrogenic injury: a follow-up study of return of sensation and taste. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1994;52:1028-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(94)90168-6
  20. Hillerup S. Iatrogenic injury to oral branches of the trigeminal nerve: records of 449 cases. Clin Oral Investig 2007;11:133-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-006-0089-5
  21. Sandstedt P, So¨rensen S. Neurosensory disturbances of the trigeminal nerve: a long-term follow-up of traumatic injuries. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;53:498-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(95)90055-1
  22. Lautenbacher S, Kunz M, Strate P, Nielsen J, Arendt-Nielsen L. Age effects on pain thresholds, temporal summation and spatial summation of heat and pressure pain. Pain 2005;115:410-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2005.03.025
  23. Harn SD, Durham TM. Incidence of lingual nerve trauma and postinjection complications in conventional mandibular block anesthesia. J Am Dent Assoc 1990;121:519-23. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1990.0198
  24. Pogrel MA, Kaban LB. Injuries to the inferior alveolar and lingual nerves. J Calif Dent Assoc 1993;21:50-4.
  25. Robinson PP, Winkles PA. The number and distribution of fungiform papillae and taste buds after lingual nerve injuries in cats. Arch Oral Biol 1991; 36:885-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(91)90119-F
  26. Dao TT, Mellor A. Sensory disturbances associated with implant surgery. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:462-9.
  27. Teerijoki-Oksa T, Ja¨a¨skela¨inen S, Forssell K, Virtanen A, Forssell H . An evaluation of clinical and electrophysiologic tests in nerve injury diagnosis after mandibular sagittal split osteotomy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;32:15-23. https://doi.org/10.1054/ijom.2002.0325
  28. Sunderland S. Factors influencing the course of regeneration and the quality of the recovery after nerve suture. Brain 1952;75:19- 54. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/75.1.19
  29. Robinson PP, Smith KG. A study on the efficacy of late lingual nerve repair. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996;34:96-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-4356(96)90144-8
  30. Westermark A, Englesson L, Bongenhielm U. Neurosensory function after sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible: a comparison between subjective evaluation and objective assessment. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1999;14:268-75.
  31. Leira JI, Gilhuus-Moe OT. Sensory impairment following sagittal split osteotomy for correction of mandibular retrognathism. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1991;6:161-7.
  32. Essick GK. Comprehensive clinical evaluation of perioral sensory function. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 1992;4:503- 526.
  33. Blomqvist JE, Alberius P, Isaksson S. Sensibility following sagittal split osteotomy in the mandible: a prospective clinical study. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;102:325-33. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199808000-00005
  34. Chen N, Neal CE, Lingenbrink P, Bloomquist D, Kiyak HA. Neurosensory changes following orthognathic surgery. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1999;14:259-67.
  35. Campbell RL, Shamaskin RG, Harkins SW. Assessment of recovery from injury to inferior alveolar and mental nerves. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1987;64:519-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(87)90024-7
  36. Ylikontiola L, Kinnunen J, Oikarinen K. Comparison of different tests assessing neurosensory disturbances after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;27:417-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(98)80028-3
  37. Poort LJ, van Neck JW, van der Wal KG. Sensory testing of inferior alveolar nerve injuries: a review of methods used in prospective studies. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:292-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.076
  38. Ziccardi VB, Hullett JS, Gomes J. Physical neurosensory testing versus current perception threshold assessment in trigeminalnerve injuries related to dental treatment: a retrospective study. Quintessence Int 2009;40:603-9.
  39. Kipp DP, Goldstein BH, Weiss WW Jr. Dysesthesia after mandibular third molar surgery: a retrospective study and analysis of 1,377 surgical procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 1980;100: 185-92. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1980.0074
  40. Behnia H, Kheradvar A, Shahrokhi M. An anatomic study of the lingual nerve in the third molar region. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58: 649-51; discussion 652-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(00)90159-9
  41. Chossegros C, Guyot L, Cheynet F, Belloni D, Blanc JL. Is lingual nerve protection necessary for lower third molar germectomy? A prospective study of 300 procedures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002;31:620-4. https://doi.org/10.1054/ijom.2002.0236
  42. Girard KR. Considerations in the management of damage to the mandibular nerve. J Am Dent Assoc 1979;98:65-71. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1979.0015
  43. Posnick JC, Zimbler AG, Grossman JA. Normal cutaneous sensibility of the face. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990;86:429-33; discussion 434-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199009000-00006
  44. Robinson PP. The effect of injury on the properties of afferent fibres in the lingual nerve. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1992;30:39- 45. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-4356(92)90135-6
  45. LaBanc JP, Gregg.JM., Trigeminal nerve injury. Basic problems, historical perspectives, early successes and remaining challenges. In: LaBanc JP, Gregg JM, eds: Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America: Trigeminal Nerve Injury: Diagnosis and Management. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1992: 277-83.
  46. Bagheri SC, Meyer RA, Khan HA, Kuhmichel A, Steed MB. Retrospective review of microsurgical repair of 222 lingual nerve injuries. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:715-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.09.111
  47. Ja¨a¨skela¨inen SK, Teerijoki-Oksa T, Virtanen A, Tenovuo O, Forssell H. Sensory regeneration following intraoperatively verified trigeminal nerve injury. Neurology 2004;62:1951-7. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000129490.67954.C2
  48. Kobayashi A, Yoshimasu H, Kobayashi J, Amagasa T. Neurosensory alteration in the lower lip and chin area after orthognathic surgery: bilateral sagittal split osteotomy versus inverted L ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006;64:778- 84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2006.01.009
  49. Schultze-Mosgau S, Erbe M, Rudolph D, Ott R, Neukam FW. Prospective study on post-traumatic and postoperative sensory disturbances of the inferior alveolar nerve and infraorbital nerve in mandibular and midfacial fractures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1999;27:86-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-5182(99)80019-5
  50. Ghali GE, Jones DL, Wolford LM. Somatosensory evoked potential assessment of the inferior alveolar nerve following third molar extraction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;19:18-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(05)80562-4