Article

Odontogenic epithelial hamartomas in periodontal structures

Journal Of Clinical Periodontology (Impact Factor: 3.69). 01/1989; 16(2):92 - 97. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.1989.tb01620.x

ABSTRACT Abstract 4 hamartomas apparently derived from remnants of the dental lamina and enamel organ are reported in a collection of human jaw specimens. These epithelial lesions represent a transitional stage between a developmental anomaly and a distinct odontogenic neoplasm. Earlier reports indicated that such lesions with clinical symptoms are rare; however, this study suggests a more common occurrence on a microscopic level.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
25 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Peripheral odontogenic tumours (POT) are rare benign focal overgrowths of the oral soft tissue, usually occurring in the gingiva. Between 1996-2000, 6 out of 406 excised gingival lesions were diagnosed as POT (1.5%). Tumours included peripheral odontogenic fibroma (2 patients), peripheral calcifying odontogenic cyst (2 patients), peripheral ameloblastoma (1 patient), and peripheral calcifying epithelial odontogenic tumour (1 patient). Review of the literature reveals that peripheral odontogenic fibroma and peripheral ameloblastoma were the most common POT. The purpose of this article was to analyse the clinical data of these tumours according to the presented cases and the literature review, to elucidate typical features of each tumour type and enhance easy identification.
    International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 05/2004; 33(3):268-73. · 1.52 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: AbsstarctA rare case of a multicentric peripheral ameloblastoma of the gingiva in a 54-year-old male patient is described along with a light and electron microscopic study of the excised tumors. The peripheral ameloblastoma is considered to be the gingival counterpart of the more common intraosseous ameloblastoma. Although both tumors have similar histomorphologic characteristics, their clinical appearance and behavior are completely different. The peripheral ameloblastoma is slow growing and non-invasive, and recurrence is uncommon following excision. The more common central ameloblasloma, is locally invasive and can destroy large segments of the jaw. The histogenesis of the peripheral ameloblastoma and several other odontogenic tumors of the gingiva serves to illustrate the proliferative potential of the basal cell layer of gingival epithelium.
    Journal Of Clinical Periodontology 12/2005; 19(4):281 - 287. · 3.69 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The jawbone is replete with a vestige of odontogenesis. The overall consensus is that intraosseous remnants of the enamel organ and dental lamina are the only histogenetic option for central epithelial odontogenic tumors. Curiously, incipient tumors or possible precursor conditions of residual odontogenic epithelium have rarely been reported in the literature. We microscopically evaluated 39,660 biopsy samples to determine the presence of a tumor-like odontogenic epithelial nodule in the maxilla and mandible. Seven intraosseous specimens that associated with a focal proliferation of odontogenic epithelium were retrieved. Six hamartomatous processes showed four different morphologic patterns comparable with the tumor nests comprising ameloblastoma (n = 1), squamous odontogenic tumor (n=1), calcifying epithelial odontogenic tumor (n=2) and calcifying cystic odontogenic tumor (n=2). Among six lesions, four were the intrafollicular development. The remaining case of interest was multiple hyperplastic clear rests of Malassez in association with an impacted tooth. Although it is impossible to predict the fate of these microscopic structures of hamartomatous character, the present case series indicates that any of the dormant embryonic residues of odontogenic epithelium can return to an active state, capable of non-reactive, probably neoplastic proliferation of pathological significance.
    Journal of Oral Pathology and Medicine 04/2007; 36(4):229-35. · 2.06 Impact Factor