2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2017.01.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lingual Nerve Measurements in Cadaveric Dissections: Clinical Applications

Abstract: Given the multiple procedures by dental practitioners and maxillofacial surgeons, the LN is at high risk for injury. This study validates the proximity of the LN to anatomic structures commonly encountered during head and neck procedures.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1,2,14 In addition, in recent years there has been increase in trends of putting dental implants in mandibular posterior region which has also led to damage of lingual nerve causing paresthesia of tongue 9,15,16 and altered sensation. 17,18 Various authors had described the spatial variation of lingual nerve 5,7,8,[19][20][21] and abnormal communication of lingual nerve with auriculotemporal nerve 11,12 and inferior alveolar nerve. 22,23 Variations also exist on the level of trifurcation of lingual nerve, inferior alveolar nerve and auriculotemporal nerve.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1,2,14 In addition, in recent years there has been increase in trends of putting dental implants in mandibular posterior region which has also led to damage of lingual nerve causing paresthesia of tongue 9,15,16 and altered sensation. 17,18 Various authors had described the spatial variation of lingual nerve 5,7,8,[19][20][21] and abnormal communication of lingual nerve with auriculotemporal nerve 11,12 and inferior alveolar nerve. 22,23 Variations also exist on the level of trifurcation of lingual nerve, inferior alveolar nerve and auriculotemporal nerve.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In another study performed on University of Alabama in 28 hemisected cadaveric skulls, the vertical measurement was 7 mm. 20 This study measured the vertical distance at the second molar region while the measurement of this study was taken at the third molar region. The difference in the measurement can also be explained by the fact that the third molar crest lies lateral to the second molar and is at the higher level.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At Carnegie stages 20 to 21 (weeks 7–7.5 of development), the submandibular duct is formed by a bistratified cuboidal epithelium and is located cranial to the lingual nerve and the parasympathetic ganglion 9 . Commonly, the lingual nerve crosses the submandibular duct at the interproximal space in the mandibular molar region 2,10 . To our knowledge, there were only 4 studies that investigated the anatomical relationship between the lingual nerve and submandibular duct (Supplementary Digital Content, Table 1, http://links.lww.com/SCS/D256).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 Commonly, the lingual nerve crosses the submandibular duct at the interproximal space in the mandibular molar region. 2,10 To our knowledge, there were only 4 studies that investigated the anatomical relationship between the lingual nerve and submandibular duct (Supplementary Digital Content, Table 1, http://links.lww.com/SCS/D256). The incidence without the cross of the 2 was 0% to 7.1%.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Out of 152 initially evaluated, 131 were excluded due to (1) being case reports or case series ( n = 21); (2) having no data, which was relevant to the study topic ( n = 67); (3) having no numerical data ( n = 43). Finally, a total of 21 studies were included in this meta‐analysis (Al‐Amery et al, 2016; Behnia et al, 2000; Benninger et al, 2013; Chan et al, 2010; Dias et al, 2015; Erdogmus et al, 2008; Hölzle & Wolff, 2001; Iwanaga, 2017; Karakas et al, 2007; Kiesselbach & Chamberlain, 1984; Kikuta et al, 2019; Kim et al, 2004; Kocabiyik et al, 2009; Mendes et al, 2013; Miloro et al, 1997; Pogrel et al, 1995; Shimoo et al, 2017; Shinohara et al, 2010; Sittitavornwong et al, 2017; Tan et al, 2014; Trost et al, 2009). Furthermore, The AQUA tool, which was designed explicitly for anatomical meta‐analyses, was used to minimize the potential bias of included studies (Henry et al, 2016).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%