Risiko und Vermeidung von Läsionen des N. lingualis bei der Weisheitszahnosteotomie

Abstract

The literature review revealed insufficient data quality for a sound data-based decision on whether and when to use an instrument to protect the lingual nerve. In any case, the statistical risk of a temporary disturbance of the lingual nerve seems to be higher with use of the lingual split (0.5%-19.8%) than with the lateral osteomtomy technique (0%-1.9%). In contrast to widespread opinion, even in anatomically difficult cases, there seems to be no statistical advantage of the standardized use of a protective instrument either in respect to temporary or permanent nerve damage. Yet, a slight increase of temporary lesions seems to be documented when the instrument is used. According to the current literature data, the subperiosteal insertion of an instrument to protect the lingual nerve cannot be considered an essential standard procedure in each case.

Prefabricated nerve conduits advance histomorphological and functional outcomes in nerve regeneration of the sciatic nerve of the rat

“…Lesions, including complete axonotmesis of peripheral nerves, appear in the head and neck area after accidents and as a result of destructive growth processes; they are within the scope of elective and regulative surgical interventions 13,15 . The peripheral nerves have a greater potency for nerve regeneration than nerve fibres of the central nervous system, but an entire restitutio ad integrum is rare after axonal lesions 10,19 .…”