ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
The inferior alveolar nerve at the proximal fragment during bilateral sagittal split osteotomy - Is there need to reposition to distal fragment?
Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) injury is most common in bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) cases. The present standard is to always reposition the IAN from the proximal fragment to the distal fragment during surgery. This study aims to assess the severity and incidence of postoperative injury and the recovery of the inferior alveolar nerve in proximal fragment entrapment. Methods: - A total of 35 patients (70 BSSO osteotomies) with mandibular deformities requiring movements equal to or less than 6 mm were selected. Twenty out of 70 osteotomies had IAN on the proximal fragment (Group 1) while splitting. Group 2 included 20 osteotomies with IAN on the distal segment in the same patients. Therefore, 15 patients who had IAN on distal segments on both sides were excluded from this study. All the BSSO procedures were performed by the same surgeon. Postoperative recovery and follow-up were performed on the immediate 1st postoperative day and at 3-, 6- and 12-month intervals. The nociception (pin-prick discrimination) test and mechanoreceptive tactile skin test with cotton fibrils were performed by a third clinician who was blinded to the procedure to assess IAN sensation. Conclusion: There was no significant difference between the groups in the recovery of IAN sensation after 6 months and the 1-year period. Hence reposition of IAN from the proximal segment to the distal segment during BSSO surgery may not be mandatory if the required movement is within 6 mm. This avoids unnecessary manipulation of the IAN over the proximal fragment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.