Fujita Shigeyuki, Tojyo Itaru, Nakanishi Takashi, Suzuki Shigeru
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Wakayama Medical University, Kimiidera 811-1, Wakayama, 641-8509, Japan.
Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2022 Mar 1;44(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s40902-022-00335-9.
No studies have compared the outcomes of direct perineurial suture with vein graft cuff repair and indirect collagen allograft repair of the lingual nerve following an injury. Therefore, we evaluated and compared the outcomes of each over a 1-year observation period. We retrospectively assessed 20 patients who had undergone microneurosurgical repair of unilateral lingual nerve injuries at the Wakayama Medical University Hospital between May 2015 and March 2019. We utilized two different methods for lingual nerve repair, i.e., direct perineurial repair with a vein graft cuff and interpositional collagen allograft repair. Sensory and taste function in the lingual nerve were preoperatively evaluated using a static two-point discrimination test, superficial pain/tactile sensation test, tests for the pressure pain threshold (Semmens-Weinstein monofilament), test for thermal discrimination hot and cold sensation, and a taste discrimination test. These tests were performed again at 6 and 12 months postoperatively.
Compared to the preoperative conditions, all patients showed improved sensory reactions. Functional sensory recovery outcomes were defined by Pogrel's criteria, Medical Research Council Scale grades, and functional sensory recovery. In each group, all patients improved after the operation. However, the operation time was significantly shorter for an interpositional collagen allograft repair as compared to that for a direct perineurial repair with a vein graft cuff.
There were no statistically significant differences between the two repair Methods, except for the operation time. Both methods led to satisfactory results for all criteria. From an economic point of view, direct perineurial repair with a vein graft cuff is meaningful; however, the esthetic effect on the donor site should be considered. Conversely, interpositional collagen allograft repair has the advantage of a greatly shortened operation time.
尚无研究比较舌神经损伤后直接神经束膜缝合、静脉移植套袖修复和间接胶原同种异体移植修复的效果。因此,我们在1年的观察期内评估并比较了每种方法的效果。我们回顾性评估了2015年5月至2019年3月期间在和歌山县医科大学医院接受单侧舌神经损伤显微神经外科修复的患者。我们采用了两种不同的舌神经修复方法,即带静脉移植套袖的直接神经束膜修复和胶原同种异体移植修复。术前使用静态两点辨别试验、浅表疼痛/触觉感觉试验、压力痛阈试验(Semmens-Weinstein单丝)、热辨别冷热感觉试验和味觉辨别试验对舌神经的感觉和味觉功能进行评估。术后6个月和12个月再次进行这些试验。
与术前情况相比,所有患者的感觉反应均有所改善。功能性感觉恢复结果根据Pogrel标准、医学研究理事会量表分级和功能性感觉恢复来定义。在每组中,所有患者术后均有改善。然而,与带静脉移植套袖的直接神经束膜修复相比,胶原同种异体移植修复的手术时间明显更短。
除手术时间外,两种修复方法之间无统计学显著差异。两种方法在所有标准下均取得了满意的结果。从经济角度来看,带静脉移植套袖的直接神经束膜修复是有意义的;然而,应考虑对供体部位的美学影响。相反,胶原同种异体移植修复具有手术时间大大缩短的优点。