Case series and review of glandular odontogenic cyst with emphasis on treatment modalities

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 746-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehrnoush Momeni Roochi ◽  
Iman Tavakoli ◽  
Fatemeh Mojgan Ghazi ◽  
Ali Tavakoli
2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Opondo ◽  
S Shaik ◽  
J Opperman ◽  
CJ Nortjé

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (211) ◽  
pp. 705-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bidhata Ojha ◽  
Dipshikha Bajracharya ◽  
Radha Baral ◽  
Shubrata Bhattacharyya ◽  
Saurabh Roy ◽  
...  

Glandular odontogenic cyst is rare phenomenon with 0.012% to 0.03. 3% frequency of all jaw cysts and worldwide prevalence of 0.17%. Diagnosis of Glandular odontogenic cyst, well known for its aggressive growth potential and high rate of recurrence, is very crucial. This report presents cases of two 50-year old individuals with Glandular odontogenic cyst presenting as a radiolucent lesion of maxilla. Final diagnosis was made on the basis of histopathological features and further confirmed by immunohistochemical analysis.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 653
Author(s):  
Gokhan Gurler ◽  
Humam Al-Ghamian ◽  
Nihan Aksakalli ◽  
Cagri Delilbasi

Dental Update ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manouchehri Shaadi ◽  
Amini Ali

Abstract: A Glandular Odontogenic Cyst (GOC) is a rare developmental cyst of odontogenic origin. Occurrence rate is low, with less than 150 cases reported in the literature thus far. 1 GOCs can be misdiagnosed due to clinicopathological similarities to other odontogenic cysts, including those of a benign and malignant nature. A wide range of ages can be affected, with a mean age of 45.7. 2 The most commonly affected site appears to be the anterior mandible. An unusual presentation of a GOC affecting the right posterior mandible of a 42-year-old male is reported. CPD/Clinical Relevance: This article highlights the importance of appropriate special investigations for a glandular odontogenic keratocyst and treatment modalities.


Author(s):  
Roberta Rayra Martins-Chaves ◽  
Mariana Granucci ◽  
Ricardo Santiago Gomez ◽  
Wagner Henriques de Castro

Author(s):  
M. Vanishree ◽  
Santosh Hunasgi ◽  
Anila Koneru ◽  
Vardendra Manvikar ◽  
Surekha Ramulu

Author(s):  
Robert Power ◽  
Philip Smyth ◽  
Noel E Donlon ◽  
Timothy Nugent ◽  
Claire L Donohoe ◽  
...  

Summary Background Chyle leakage is an uncommon but potentially life-threatening complication following esophageal resections. The optimal management strategy is not clear, with a limited evidence base. Methods Searches were conducted up to 31 December 2020 on MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science for randomized trials or retrospective studies that evaluated the management of chyle leakage following esophageal resection. Two authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed for bias. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD: 42021224895) and reported in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Results A total of 530 citations were reviewed. Twenty-five studies, totaling 1016 patients met the inclusion criteria, including two low-quality clinical trials and 23 retrospective case series. Heterogeneity of study design and outcomes prevented meta-analysis. The overall incidence of chyle leak/fistula was 3.2%. Eighteen studies describe management of chyle leaks conservatively, 17 by surgical ligation of the thoracic duct, 5 by pleurodesis, and 6 described percutaneous lymphangiography with thoracic duct embolization or disruption. Conclusions The evidence base for optimal management of chyle leakage postesophagectomy is lacking, which may be related to its low incidence. There is a paucity of high-quality prospective studies directly comparing treatment modalities, but there is some low-certainty evidence that percutaneous approaches have reduced morbidity but lower efficacy compared with surgery. Further high-quality, prospective studies that compare interventions at different levels of severity are needed to determine the optimal approach to treatment.


Oral Oncology ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 41 (9) ◽  
pp. 895-902 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilana Kaplan ◽  
Yakir Anavi ◽  
Ronen Manor ◽  
Jaqueline Sulkes ◽  
Shlomo Calderon

Author(s):  
MAYSA NOGUEIRA DE BARROS MELO ◽  
PIETRY DY TARSO INÃ ALVES MALAQUIAS ◽  
SANYRA LOPES DIAS ◽  
GABRIEL QUEIROZ VASCONCELOS OLIVEIRA ◽  
BRÁULIO CARNEIRO ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document