MedElevator
Войти в исследования Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2026
Predictive factors in tomographic imaging for inferior alveolar nerve injury during third-molar surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Thereza-Bussolaro Claudine, Fagundes Nathalia, Pacheco-Pereira Camila, Normando David, Flores-Mir Carlos, Borba Alexandre Meireles
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In this systematic review, the authors aimed to summarize existing predictive models for identifying patients at high risk of experiencing inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) injury after third-molar extraction.
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: Retrospective and prospective cohort studies, randomized clinical trials, and nested case-control studies were included. All studies used tomographic imaging obtained before and after surgery to assess patient risk of experiencing an IAN injury after mandibular third-molar extraction, with a focus on the anatomic position, shape, and features of the mandibular canal in relation to IAN injury risk.
RESULTS: In 18 studies, researchers identified 8 tomographic features that predict IAN injury during third-molar extraction. Sixteen studies had a low risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework indicated moderate to high certainty of evidence. Significant increases in odds ratios (ORs) (with P < .001) were observed for the absence of cortical bone (OR, 9.87; 95% CI, 4.10 to 23.83), a dumbbell-shaped canal (OR, 8.25; 95% CI, 3.19 to 21.35), and a lingual position (OR, 3.82; 95% CI, 1.95 to 7.39. Patients exhibiting all 3 features had an increased risk of experiencing IAN injury after mandibular third-molar extraction (OR, 5.06; 95% CI, 2.23 to 11.39).
CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Oral and maxillofacial radiologists should report these high-risk features to inform dental surgeons and patients. Less traumatic surgical techniques as well as precautionary measures should be considered to minimize IAN injury risks during third-molar extraction. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024582042).
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: Retrospective and prospective cohort studies, randomized clinical trials, and nested case-control studies were included. All studies used tomographic imaging obtained before and after surgery to assess patient risk of experiencing an IAN injury after mandibular third-molar extraction, with a focus on the anatomic position, shape, and features of the mandibular canal in relation to IAN injury risk.
RESULTS: In 18 studies, researchers identified 8 tomographic features that predict IAN injury during third-molar extraction. Sixteen studies had a low risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework indicated moderate to high certainty of evidence. Significant increases in odds ratios (ORs) (with P < .001) were observed for the absence of cortical bone (OR, 9.87; 95% CI, 4.10 to 23.83), a dumbbell-shaped canal (OR, 8.25; 95% CI, 3.19 to 21.35), and a lingual position (OR, 3.82; 95% CI, 1.95 to 7.39. Patients exhibiting all 3 features had an increased risk of experiencing IAN injury after mandibular third-molar extraction (OR, 5.06; 95% CI, 2.23 to 11.39).
CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Oral and maxillofacial radiologists should report these high-risk features to inform dental surgeons and patients. Less traumatic surgical techniques as well as precautionary measures should be considered to minimize IAN injury risks during third-molar extraction. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42024582042).