• A S Ali, J A Benton, and J M Yates.
• Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Division of Dentistry, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
• J Oral Rehabil. 2018 Mar 1; 45 (3): 250-257.

AbstractThe removal of mandibular third molar teeth is one of the most common oral surgical procedures. In a significant number of patients, it carries a degree of associated morbidity, including damage to the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN). For this reason, practitioners desire the most up-to-date guidance on the most appropriate technique, informed by the best available evidence that will produce the lowest incidence of iatrogenic complications. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review comparing the effect of coronectomy vs complete surgical extraction of mandibular third molar teeth on the risk of IAN injury and other complications in adults. Studies were identified through Embase (1980-2016) and Ovid MEDLINE (1946-2016) database searches. Search terms included coronectomy, partial root removal, deliberate vital root retention, odontectomy, surgical removal, surgical extraction, complete tooth extraction and extract. Limits of the study included humans, English language and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Only RCTs comparing IAN damage associated with surgical extraction of mandibular third molars vs coronectomy were included. From our database searches, we identified two unique RCTs matching the inclusion criteria. Both evaluated patients who had specific radiographic signs of intimate relationships with the IAN. Upon detailed analysis, the studies were noted to exhibit a high risk of bias in many categories, thereby rendering their results inconclusive. Although evidence from two RCTs suggests that coronectomy can reduce the risk of IAN injury compared to surgical removal of high-risk mandibular third molars, the quality of evidence is insufficient to provide definitive conclusions regarding the preferred technique.© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

21 keywords...

hide…