Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison of LNIG and CG based on Winter’s classification

From: Risk of lingual nerve injuries in removal of mandibular third molars: a retrospective case-control study

 

This study (LNIG)

Cheung et al, 2010 (CG) [9]

Almendros-Marqués et al, 2006 (CG) [15]

Uematsu et al, 2015 (CG) [16]

Oguma et al, 2013 (CG) [18]

Smith et al, 2013 (CG) [11]

Distoangular (%)

30.8

10.7

15.8

1.2

0.2

31.0

Horizontal (%)

30.8

26.0

12.4

50.9

66.7

13.0

Mesioangular (%)

19.2

47.9

20.5

27.5

18.7

32.0

Vertical (%)

11.5

15.4

47.9

19.7

13.9

21.0

Inverted (%)

3.8

0

3.5

0.7

0.5

0

Other (%)

3.8

0

0

0

0

3.0

P value (disto-)

 

0.009

0.036

<0.0001

<0.0001

0.979

P value (horizo-)

 

0.437

0.023

0.991

1

0.029

P value (mesio-)

 

0.997

0.755

0.929

0.682

0.973

P value (vert-)

 

0.738

1

0.879

0.668

0.906

P value (invert-)

  

0.575

0.155

0.002

 
  1. Abbreviations: LNIG lingual nerve injury group, CG control group
  2. P value (chi-squared test): The ratio of Winter's classification in this study was statistically compared to the ratio found in other past studies. P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant