본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

설신경 손상 환자의 회복에 대한 후향적 연구

Recovery of lingual nerve injury: retrospective observational study

이종호|김명진|김성민|임호경|홍동환
대한구강악안면외과학회 (Korean Association Of Oral And Maxillofacial Surgeons)|2011.10|대한구강악안면외과학회지 (Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons)|제37권 제5호|pp. 355-364

2

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

Retrospective studyNerve injuryLingual nerve
주제분류치의학

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.

Abstract

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.

참고문헌 (50)

  1. Fielding AF, "Lingual nerve paresthesia following third molar surgery: a retrospective clinical study", Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 84, pp.345~348 (1997)
  2. Blackburn CW, "Lingual nerve damage associated with the removal of lower third molars", Br Dent J, 167, pp.103~107 (1989)
  3. Black CG, "Sensory impairment following lower third molar surgery: a prospective study in New Zealand", N Z Dent J, 93, pp.68~71 (1997)
  4. Wofford DT, "Prospective study of dysesthesia following odontectomy of impacted mandibular third molars", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 45, pp.15~19 (1987)
  5. Krafft TC, "Clinical investigation into the incidence of direct damage to the lingual nerve caused by local anaesthesia", J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 22, pp.294~296 (1994)
  6. Karas ND, "Recovery of neurosensory function following orthognathic surgery", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 48, pp.124~134 (1990)
  7. Chiapasco MDe Cicco L, "Side effects and complications associated with third molar surgery", Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 76, pp.412~420 (1993)
  8. Middlehurst RJ, "Postoperative morbidity with mandibular third molar surgery: a comparison of two techniques", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 46, pp.474~476 (1988)
  9. Carmichael FA, "Incidence of nerve damage following third molar removal: a West of Scotland Oral Surgery Research Group study", Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 30, pp.78~82 (1992)
  10. 한성희, "하악 제3대구치 발치 후 발생한 하치조신경 및 설신경 손상에 관한 연구", 대한치과의사협회지, 47(4), pp.211~224 (2009), 대한치과의사협회
  11. Mason DA, "Lingual nerve damage following lower third molar surgery", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 17, pp.290~294 (1988)
  12. Hillerup S, "Lingual nerve injury in third molar surgery I. Observations on recovery of sensation with spontaneous healing", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 36, pp.884~889 (2007)
  13. 이종호, "하치조신경 및 설신경 손상 평가를 위한 한국인 정상 성인의 하순-이부 및 혀의 감각 조사", 대한악안면성형재건외과학회지, 25(2), pp.114~122 (2003), 대한악안면성형재건외과학회
  14. Sunderland S, "A classification of peripheral nerve injuries producing loss of function", Brain, 74, pp.491~516 (1951)
  15. Robinson PP, "A prospective, quantitative study on the clinical outcome of lingual nerve repair", Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 38, pp.255~263 (2000)
  16. Rath EM, "Perioral somesthetic sensibility: do the skin of the lower face and the midface exhibit comparable sensitivity?", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 48, pp.1181~1190 (1990)
  17. Pogrel MA, "Permanent nerve involvement resulting from inferior alveolar nerve blocks", J Am Dent Assoc, 131, pp.901~907 (2000)
  18. Venta¨ I, "Malpractice claims for permanent nerve injuries related to third molar removals", Acta Odontol Scand, 56, pp.193~196 (1998)
  19. Hillerup S, "Repair of the lingual nerve after iatrogenic injury: a follow-up study of return of sensation and taste", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 52, pp.1028~1031 (1994)
  20. Hillerup S, "Iatrogenic injury to oral branches of the trigeminal nerve: records of 449 cases", Clin Oral Investig, 11, pp.133~142 (2007)
  21. Sandstedt P, "Neurosensory disturbances of the trigeminal nerve: a long-term follow-up of traumatic injuries", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 53, pp.498~505 (1995)
  22. Lautenbacher S, "Age effects on pain thresholds, temporal summation and spatial summation of heat and pressure pain", Pain, 115, pp.410~418 (2005)
  23. Harn SD, "Incidence of lingual nerve trauma and postinjection complications in conventional mandibular block anesthesia", J Am Dent Assoc, 121, pp.519~523 (1990)
  24. Pogrel MA, "Injuries to the inferior alveolar and lingual nerves", J Calif Dent Assoc, 21, pp.50~54 (1993)
  25. Robinson PP, "The number and distribution of fungiform papillae and taste buds after lingual nerve injuries in cats", Arch Oral Biol, 36, pp.885~891 (1991)
  26. Dao TT, "Sensory disturbances associated with implant surgery", Int J Prosthodon, 11, pp.462~469 (1998)
  27. Teerijoki-Oksa T, "An evaluation of clinical and electrophysiologic tests in nerve injury diagnosis after mandibular sagittal split osteotomy", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 32, pp.15~23 (2003)
  28. Sunderland S, "Factors influencing the course of regeneration and the quality of the recovery after nerve suture", Brain, 75, pp.19~54 (1952)
  29. Robinson PP, "A study on the efficacy of late lingual nerve repair", Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 34, pp.96~103 (1996)
  30. Westermark A, "Neurosensory function after sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible: a comparison between subjective evaluation and objective assessment", Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 14, pp.268~275 (1999)
  31. Leira JI, "Sensory impairment following sagittal split osteotomy for correction of mandibular retrognathism", Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 6, pp.161~167 (1991)
  32. Essick GK, "Comprehensive clinical evaluation of perioral sensory function", Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am, 4, pp.503~526 (1992)
  33. Blomqvist JE, "Sensibility following sagittal split osteotomy in the mandible: a prospective clinical study", Plast Reconstr Surg, 102, pp.325~333 (1998)
  34. Chen N, "Neurosensory changes following orthognathic surgery", Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 14, pp.259~267 (1999)
  35. Campbell RL, "Assessment of recovery from injury to inferior alveolar and mental nerves", Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 64, pp.519~526 (1987)
  36. Ylikontiola L, "Comparison of different tests assessing neurosensory disturbances after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 27, pp.417~421 (1998)
  37. Poort LJ, "Sensory testing of inferior alveolar nerve injuries: a review of methods used in prospective studies", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 67, pp.292~300 (2009)
  38. Ziccardi VB, "Physical neurosensory testing versus current perception threshold assessment in trigeminal nerve injuries related to dental treatment: a retrospective study", Quintessence In, 40, pp.603~609 (2009)
  39. Kipp DP, "Dysesthesia after mandibular third molar surgery: a retrospective study and analysis of 1,377 surgical procedures", J Am Dent Assoc, 100, pp.185~192 (1980)
  40. Behnia H, "An anatomic study of the lingual nerve in the third molar region", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 58, pp.649~651 (2000)
  41. Chossegros C, "Is lingual nerve protection necessary for lower third molar germectomy? A prospective study of 300 procedures", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 31, pp.620~624 (2002)
  42. Girard KR, "Considerations in the management of damage to the mandibular nerve", J Am Dent Assoc, 98, pp.65~71 (1979)
  43. Posnick JC, "Normal cutaneous sensibility of the face", Plast Reconstr Surg, 86, pp.429~435 (1990)
  44. Robinson PP, "The effect of injury on the properties of afferent fibres in the lingual nerve", Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 30, pp.39~45 (1992)
  45. LaBanc JP, "Trigeminal nerve injury. Basic problems, historical perspectives, early successes and remaining challenges. In Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America: Trigeminal Nerve Injury: Diagnosis and Management", pp.277~283 (1992), WB Saunders
  46. Bagheri SC, "Retrospective review of microsurgical repair of 222 lingual nerve injuries", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 68, pp.715~723 (2010)
  47. Ja¨a¨skela¨inen SK, "Sensory regeneration following intraoperatively verified trigeminal nerve injury", Neurology, 62, pp.1951~1957 (2004)
  48. Kobayashi A, "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, 64, pp.778~784 (2006)
  49. Schultze-Mosgau S, "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, 27, pp.86~93 (1999)
  50. Ghali GE, "Somatosensory evoked potential assessment of the inferior alveolar nerve following third molar extraction", Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 19, pp.18~21 (1990)

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)

하악 제3대구치 발치의 결정에 관한 재고찰 - 발치 현황과 영향 인자를 중심으로김진학, 강상훈, 김봉철, 김문기, 박원서, 이상휘, 최지욱pp. 343-348하악 제3대구치의 위치와 각도가 발치 후 합병증에 미치는 영향이준, 민승기, 김원기, 김용운, 임헌준, 오세리, 홍선표pp. 349-354자가치아 뼈 이식재의 발치와내 이식 후 골 치유 양상에 관한 연구이재훈, 정재호pp. 365-374미니피그에서 자가치아뼈 이식의 골형성 효과에 대한 연구이정근, 정혜린, 황주홍pp. 375-379가토 두개골 결손 모델에서 Bioglass가 첨가된 불소화 수산화인회석의 골재생능력안효준, 한세진, 김경욱pp. 380-385
원문 보기