ArticleMaxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery2026
Prognostic factors for functional recovery after lingual nerve reconstruction using an artificial nerve conduit.
Article in Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recent Innovations and Advances in Japanese Hand Surgery.International orthopaedics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLingual nerve injury following dental procedures, such as lower third molar extractions, can cause significant sensory deficits. For patients with persistent severe symptoms, surgical reconstruction using a nerve conduit is often considered. However, the degree of recovery varies, and the optimal timing of intervention and the significance of the nerve gap distance remain subjects of clinical debate.
objectivesUsing the Medical Research Council Scale (MRCS) as a standardized measure of sensory function, this study aims to determine the independent effects of the timing of surgery, nerve gap length, and other potential prognostic factors on nerve functional recovery, specifically defining success as MRCS S3+ or higher.
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 49 patients who underwent lingual nerve repair surgery. The success of nerve recovery was evaluated using two established criteria: the standard Functional Sensory Recovery (FSR), MRCS S3 or higher, and the strict MRCS S3+ or higher criteria based on American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) criteria. The MRCS S3+ or higher criteria was designated as the primary outcome for all multivariate analyses. The time to surgery variable was logarithmically transformed, Log (Time to Surgery, months), to account for the highly skewed distribution. Statistical analysis used univariate and multivariate logistic regression to assess the association between each predictor and postoperative MRCS score. A secondary analysis examined predictors for allodynia resolution.
resultsThe logarithmically transformed time to surgery, Log (Time to Surgery, months), was the sole statistically significant independent predictor for achieving MRCS S3+ (Odds Ratio OR = 0.236, 95% CI: 0.063-0.887, P = 0.032). This indicates that earlier intervention significantly increases the odds of functional recovery. Nerve gap length was not a significant predictor (OR = 0.941, P = 0.518). Furthermore, no variable was found to be a significant predictor for allodynia resolution (P > 0.05).
conclusionEarlier surgical intervention, quantified by Log (Time to Surgery), is an independent and critical factor for achieving MRCS S3+ functional sensory recovery after lingual nerve repair. The distance of the nerve gap did not show an independent predictive effect on the final sensory outcome.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.