The use of molecular markers as an aid in the diagnosis of glandular odontogenic cyst

Kaplan, Ilana; Anavi, Yakir; Manor, Riri S.; Sulkes, Jaqueline; Calderon, Shlomo

doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2005.04.015

Cited by 65 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To our knowledge, the question of how many and which microscopic features are necessary for diagnosis of GOC has been previously addressed by only one group of investigators. Kaplan et al [11,12] proposed a list of major and minor microscopic criteria for GOC based on the frequency of each feature in reported cases from the literature. Based on their analysis, it was suggested that at least focal presence of each of the following major criteria must be present for diagnosis:…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rarely, GOCs may have numerous small islands resembling mucoepidermoid carcinoma in the cyst wall, raising the question of whether GOC and CMEC share a histopathologic spectrum, and it is not known whether this finding is associated with more aggressive or malignant behavior. Only two publications have addressed the subject of microscopic criteria for diagnosis of GOC previously: Kaplan et al [11,12] proposed major and minor microscopic criteria for GOC based on the frequency of each feature in reported cases from the literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Glandular Odontogenic Cyst: Analysis of 46 Cases with Special Emphasis on Microscopic Criteria for Diagnosis

Fowler

Brannon

Kessler

et al. 2011

Head and Neck Pathol

129

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The glandular odontogenic cyst (GOC) is now a relatively well-known entity with recent reviews indicating over 100 cases reported in the English literature. The GOC's importance relates to the fact that it exhibits a propensity for recurrence similar to the odontogenic keratocyst, and that it may be confused microscopically with central mucoepidermoid carcinoma (CMEC). Numerous histopathologic features for the GOC have been described, but the exact microscopic criteria necessary for diagnosis have not been universally accepted. Furthermore, some of the microscopic features of GOC may also be found in dentigerous, botryoid, radicular, and surgical ciliated cysts. The purpose of this multicenter retrospective study is to further define the clinical, radiographic, and microscopic features of GOC, to determine which microscopic features may be helpful for diagnosis in problematic cases, to determine the most appropriate treatment, and to determine if GOC and CMEC share a histopathologic spectrum. In our series of 46 cases, the mean age at diagnosis was 51 years with 71% of cases in the 5th-7th decades. No gender predilection was noted. 80% of cases occurred in the mandible, and 60% of the lesions involved the anterior regions of the jaws. Swelling/expansion was the most common presenting complaint, although some cases were asymptomatic. Radiographically, most cases presented as a well-defined unilocular or multilocular radiolucency involving the periapical area of multiple teeth. Some lesions displayed a scalloped border. Cases also presented in dentigerous, lateral periodontal, and ''globulomaxillary'' relationships. The canine area was a common location for maxillary cases. All cases were treated conservatively (enucleation, curettage, cystectomy, excision). Follow-up on 18 cases revealed a recurrence rate of 50% (9/18), with 6 cases recurring more than once (range of follow-up: 2 months to 20 years; average length of follow-up: 8.75 years). The mean interval from initial treatment to first recurrence was 8 years, and from first recurrence to second recurrence was 5.8 years. Two cases recurred three times and the interval from second to third recurrence was 7 years (exact interval only documented in one case). All cases exhibited eosinophilic cuboidal (hobnail) cells, a feature not specific for GOC, but necessary for diagnosis, in our opinion. Univariate analysis indicated several features that are most helpful in distinguishing GOC from GOC mimickers in problematic cases, including: (1) the presence of microcysts (P \ 0.0001); (2) epithelial spheres 123Head and Neck Pathol (2011) 5:364-375 DOI 10.1007 (P \ 0.0001); (3) clear cells (P = 0.0002); (4) variable thickness of the epithelial cyst lining (P = 0.0002); and (5) multiple compartments (P = 0.006). Stratified analysis indicated that when microcysts are present, epithelial spheres and multiple compartments are still significant, and clear cells are marginally significant in distinguishing GOCs from GOC mimickers. The presence of microcysts (P = 0.00...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Glandular Odontogenic Cyst: Analysis of 46 Cases with Special Emphasis on Microscopic Criteria for Diagnosis

Fowler

Brannon

Kessler

et al. 2011

Head and Neck Pathol

129

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, an aggressive surgical approach is important to prevent recurrences [17,19]. In GOCs with cortical perforation, resection of the overlying mucosa was also recommended [10]. In the present case, both lesions had no cortical perforations, and conservative treatment associated with peripheral ostectomy and cauterization with Carnoy's solution was performed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…The reason for the high recurrence rates, as supported by the fact that 14-86 % of cases recur following curettage [10], remains unclear but may be related to one of several possibilities. Micro cysts or small dental lamina remnants in the bone adjacent to the primary lesion may contribute to recurrence [7].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bilateral Glandular Odontogenic Cyst of Mandible: A Rare Occurrence

Akkaş

Toptaş

Özan

et al. 2014

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glandular odontogenic cysts (GOCs) of the jaw are rare with well-defined limits radiologically, unusual histopathological features and a high recurrence rate. The radiographic appearance of GOCs vary and are not pathognomonic. Definitive diagnosis of the GOC is established only by histopathological examinations. Histologically, GOC is characterized by a thin nonkeratinized squamous epithelial lining, with papillary projections, nodular thickenings, mucous (goblet) cells with intraepithelial mucous pools and intraepithelial glandular, microcystic or duct-like structures. We present an unusual case of a bilateral GOC in the mandible. This case report is also the first documented case of bilateral GOC in the mandible.

show abstract

“…While some authors believe the distinction between GOC and central mucoepidermoid carcinoma depends largely on the degree of epithelial proliferation [19] others have recommended the use of immunohistochemical markers to distinguish these two diseases [20]. Immunostaining with Ki-67, p53, CK-19 and their positivity in GOC may help in differentiating GOC from Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Glandular odontogenic cyst of posterior maxilla: A rare entity

Li¹,

Singh²,

Ji³

et al. 2016

IJCRI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International Journal of Case Reports and Images (IJCRI) is an international, peer reviewed, monthly, open access, online journal, publishing high-quality, articles in all areas of basic medical sciences and clinical specialties.Aim of IJCRI is to encourage the publication of new information by providing a platform for reporting of unique, unusual and rare cases which enhance understanding of disease process, its diagnosis, management and clinico-pathologic correlations. GOC is found to occur in fifth decade of life and the most common site of occurrence is mandible, especially the mandibular anterior region with slight predilection for males. However, its occurrence in the maxillary posterior region of a 23-year-old female with associated symptoms of pain is quite rare. Case Report: This case report presents one such rare case of GOC in right maxillary region of a 23-year-old female who was primarily diagnosed as a radicular cyst. Later, due to recurrence of the lesion, patient had to undergo enucleation and partial resection of posterior maxilla, and after a comprehensive histopathological analysis, it was finally diagnosed as GOC. Conclusion:In conclusion, Glandular odontogenic cyst being such a rare entity, this paper may enhance the existing knowledge about GOC and may guide readers and clinicians to pay special attention to similar cases when encountered in clinical work.

show abstract

The use of molecular markers as an aid in the diagnosis of glandular odontogenic cyst

Cited by 65 publications

References 40 publications

Glandular Odontogenic Cyst: Analysis of 46 Cases with Special Emphasis on Microscopic Criteria for Diagnosis

Glandular Odontogenic Cyst: Analysis of 46 Cases with Special Emphasis on Microscopic Criteria for Diagnosis

Bilateral Glandular Odontogenic Cyst of Mandible: A Rare Occurrence

Glandular odontogenic cyst of posterior maxilla: A rare entity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About