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