Clinicopathologic evaluation of malignancy adjacent to dental implants

Kaplan, Ilana; Zeevi, Itai; Tal, Haim; Rosenfeld, Eli; Chaushu, Gavriel

doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2016.08.023

Cited by 31 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Kaplan et al summarized several previous cases of PISCC (47 cases) and contributed 7 additional cases, adding the case by Moshref et al with a total of 55 cases of malignancies associated with DIs in patients with no known oncological history. The majority of PISCC (45 cases, 81.8%) occur in patients with preexisting risk factors for oral cancer such as a history of alcohol abuse or tobacco use, oral lichen planus, leukoplakia, erythroplakia, or a previous malignancy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kaplan et al stated that PISCC is not as rare and may comprise up to 1.5% of oral malignancies. This statement is in slight contrast with the theoretical standardized incidence of PISCC calculated by Raiser et al which was 0.00017 per million per year.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Presently, none of these hypotheses has been proven. No clinical, epidemiological, or histological data provides solid evidence of a correlation between DIs and oral malignancies …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Out of 55 cases reported in the literature, to date, 10 cases of primary peri‐implant malignancies including peri‐implant squamous cell carcinoma (PISCC) (Table ) have been reported in patients with no medical history of malignancy and in the absence of associated risk factors …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Oral squamous cell carcinoma mimicking peri‐implant mucositis

Coopman

Coropciuc

Hauben

et al. 2019

Oral Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the past decades, dental implants have become a widespread pillar of dental rehabilitation in partial and edentulous patients. Recently, an increasing number of case reports mention the presence of oral carcinoma in close proximity to functional dental implants. In this particular report, we present a case of an intraoral squamous cell carcinoma mimicking, both clinically and symptomatically, peri‐implant mucositis. To date, no plausible association between dental implants and oral squamous cell carcinoma is recognized. Clinicians should be aware of the importance of good clinical investigations, especially in cases where the clinical investigations do not match the radiological and histological findings. Every suspect mucosal lesion should be thoroughly investigated by biopsy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Presently, none of these hypotheses has been proven. No clinical, epidemiological, or histological data provides solid evidence of a correlation between DIs and oral malignancies …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Oral squamous cell carcinoma mimicking peri‐implant mucositis

Coopman

Coropciuc

Hauben

et al. 2019

Oral Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dental implants are safe procedures for restoring tooth loss, but their failure can be influenced by different local and systemic factors. Local benign and malignant conditions are rarely reported in association with dental implants (Kaplan et al, ; Kaplan et al, ), and implant‐associated peripheral giant cell granuloma (IA‐PGCG) is one of the most relevant peri‐implant hyperplastic lesions reported (Olmedo, Paparella, Brandizzi, & Cabrini, ). This lesion is a reactive condition that occurs in the gingival or alveolar mucosa, and it is characterized by an unencapsulated proliferation of mononuclear ovoid or spindle‐shaped cells intermingled with osteoclast‐type multinucleated cells in a vascular background.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

KRAS mutations in implant‐associated peripheral giant cell granuloma

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To investigate the molecular pathogenesis of implant‐associated peripheral giant cell granuloma (IA‐PGCG). Methods A convenience sample of 15 IA‐PGCG cases was selected. Hotspot mutations of KRAS, FGFR1, and TRPV4 genes, previously reported in conventional giant cell lesions of the jaws, were investigated by Sanger sequencing. As these mutations could activate MAPK/ERK pathway, the expression of phospho‐ERK1/2 was also evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Results KRAS mutations were detected in 8/15 (53.4%) samples. Similar to conventional peripheral giant cell granuloma, the KRAS mutations most frequently occurred in codon 146 (p.A146V, n = 3), followed by codon 12 (p.G12A and p.G12D, n = 1 each) and codon 14 (p.V14L, n = 1). Variants of unknown significance (VUS) were also detected in two cases, affecting codons 37 (p.E37K) and 127 (p.T127I). All samples showed wild‐type (WT) sequences for FGFR1 and TRPV4 genes. Consistent with MAPK/ERK pathway activation, all mononuclear cells of the lesion showed strong staining for phospho‐ERK1/2 protein in the immunohistochemical analysis. Conclusions KRAS mutations and activation of the MAPK‐ERK signaling pathway occur in IA‐PGCG. This is the first study to demonstrate cancer‐associated gene mutations in a non‐neoplastic reactive condition associated with dental implants.

show abstract

Clinicopathologic evaluation of malignancy adjacent to dental implants

Cited by 31 publications

References 37 publications

Oral squamous cell carcinoma mimicking peri‐implant mucositis

Oral squamous cell carcinoma mimicking peri‐implant mucositis

KRAS mutations in implant‐associated peripheral giant cell granuloma

Peri‐implantitis management in a patient with erosive oral lichen planus. A case report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About