In this study we found that UA was frequently misdiagnosed as SA; however, there are enough clinical and microscopic features that allow for an accurate differentiation between both types of ameloblastoma that should be recognized for surgical and prognostic purposes. In this study, SA was not found in patients younger than 20 years, UA had a constant myxoid stroma while mature connective tissue was more frequently associated with the solid type.

BackgroundGastric cancer is an aggressive disease with nonspecific early symptoms. Its incidence and prognosis in young patients has shown considerable variability.Purpose of the studyOur objective was to retrospectively study patients from our institution aged <30 years with gastric carcinoma. The study was undertaken to describe the experience of gastric cancer in this population, and to demonstrate its specific clinical and pathological characteristics.Materials and methodsWe reviewed the cases of histologically confirmed gastric cancer between 1985 and 2006 at the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología of Mexico (INCan); emphasis in our review was placed on clinical presentation, diagnostic and therapeutic intervention, pathology, and the results.ResultsThirty cases of gastric carcinoma were reviewed. The patients’ median age was 27 years (range, 18–30 years) and the male:female ratio was 1:1.ConclusionGastric cancer exhibits different behavior in patients aged, 30 years, but delay in diagnosis and the tumor’s behavior appear to be the most important factors in prognosis of the disease.

No abstract

Objectives Investigate the feasibility of saliva sampling as a noninvasive and safer tool to detect SARS-CoV-2 and to compare its reproducibility and sensitivity with nasopharyngeal swab samples (NPS). The use of sample pools was also investigated. Methods 2107 paired samples were collected from asymptomatic health care and office workers in Mexico City. Sixty of these samples were also analyzed in two other independent laboratories for concordance analysis. Sample processing and analysis of virus genetic material were performed according to standard protocols described elsewhere. Pooling analysis was performed by analyzing the saliva pool and the individual pool components. Results The concordance between NPS and saliva results was 95.2% (Kappa: 0.727, p = 0.0001) and 97.9% without considering inconclusive results (Kappa: 0.852, p = 0.0001). Saliva had a lower number of inconclusive results than NPS (0.9% vs 1.9%). Furthermore, saliva shows a significantly higher concentration of both total RNA and viral copies than NPS. Comparison of our results with those of the other two laboratories shows 100% and 97% concordance. Saliva samples are stable without the use of any preservative, a positive SARS-CoV-2 sample can be detected 5, 10, and 15 days after collection when the sample is stored at 4 °C. Conclusions Our results indicate that saliva is as effective as NPS for the identification of SARS-CoV-2-infected asymptomatic patients, sample pooling facilitates the analysis of a larger number of samples with the benefit of cost reduction.

No abstract