Third molar extraction is the most common cause of lingual nerve injury (LNI) in oral and maxillofacial surgery (Biglioli et al., 2014, 2018; Biglioli and Colletti, 2006; Hillerup, 2008; Pippi et al., 2017; Renton et al., 2005). Symptoms of LNI can range from temporary hypoesthesia to permanent sensory loss, which may include anaesthesia (both painful and non-painful), as well as dysesthesia and paraesthesia of the tongue. This sensory impairment can affect functions such as chewing, swallowing, speech, and other daily activities, significantly impacting social interactions and causing psychological and personal discomfort. The Neurosensory test (NST) and the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale are the most commonly used methods for evaluating nerve injury (Bagheri et al., 2010; Erakat et al., 2013; Jacobs et al., 2024), but they are limited in assessing both the objective and subjective aspects of this condition. Additionally, there are no established guidelines in the literature to determine when surgery is indicated.

The aim of this retrospective study is to analyze sensory recovery and, when present, the improvement of pain symptoms in patients with lingual nerve injury who underwent direct lingual nerve (LN) neurorrhaphy. This study seeks to assess both the objective recovery of LN function, using quantitative parameters obtained through neurophysiological tests, and the subjective evaluation of quality of life, as measured by a postoperative questionnaire. The primary objective is to investigate the recovery of tactile and nociceptive sensory functions, as well as the long-term impact of the treatment on quality of life, at least one year after surgery. Secondary objectives include: evaluating the correlation between surgical outcomes and the time between injury and treatment; assessing the correlation between objective and subjective results; and validating the use of neurophysiological tests as diagnostic tools by comparing them with other methods described in the literature.