TY - JOUR
T1 - Solid ameloblastoma mimicking a periodontal defect
T2 - A diagnostic dilemma
AU - Sinha, Deepti
AU - Dormaar, Titiaan
AU - Salvo, Natalia
AU - Politis, Constantinus
AU - Bornstein, Michael M.
AU - Jacobs, Reinhilde
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Purpose: To report a rare presentation of an ameloblastoma mimicking an endo-periodontal lesion. Materials and methods: In this case report, we present the unusual clinical course of a 78-year-old Caucasian male patient, seeking single tooth implant rehabilitation at location 42 (lower right lateral incisor), initially unsuccessfully treated at different clinics for a persistent endo-periodontal lesion associated with this tooth, by both an endodontist and a periodontologist, which finally lead to tooth loss. Results: CBCT imaging of the anterior mandible region revealed a persistent radiolucency and subsequent enucleation of the lesion in the partially healed extraction socket revealed the true underlying diagnosis: a solid follicular ameloblastoma. A re-entry with biopsy was planned after radiological confirmation of lesion growth 1 year later, reconfirming the diagnosis and necessitating partial segment resection of the mandible. Conclusions: In the presence of lesions refractory to therapy, consideration towards a broader differential diagnosis and an appropriate investigation should be undertaken before the decision on implant placement.
AB - Purpose: To report a rare presentation of an ameloblastoma mimicking an endo-periodontal lesion. Materials and methods: In this case report, we present the unusual clinical course of a 78-year-old Caucasian male patient, seeking single tooth implant rehabilitation at location 42 (lower right lateral incisor), initially unsuccessfully treated at different clinics for a persistent endo-periodontal lesion associated with this tooth, by both an endodontist and a periodontologist, which finally lead to tooth loss. Results: CBCT imaging of the anterior mandible region revealed a persistent radiolucency and subsequent enucleation of the lesion in the partially healed extraction socket revealed the true underlying diagnosis: a solid follicular ameloblastoma. A re-entry with biopsy was planned after radiological confirmation of lesion growth 1 year later, reconfirming the diagnosis and necessitating partial segment resection of the mandible. Conclusions: In the presence of lesions refractory to therapy, consideration towards a broader differential diagnosis and an appropriate investigation should be undertaken before the decision on implant placement.
KW - Ameloblastoma
KW - Cone beam computed tomography
KW - Dental implant
KW - Mandible
KW - Periapical lesion
KW - Periodontal defect
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84984903673&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 27314127
AN - SCOPUS:84984903673
SN - 1756-2406
VL - 9
SP - 189
EP - 193
JO - European journal of oral implantology
JF - European journal of oral implantology
IS - 2
ER -