medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-297X (Print)

2019, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Cubana Estomatol 2019; 56 (2)

Oral rehabilitation after removal of a central cemento-ossifying fibroma

de Moraes MNCL, Iwaki FL, Rosso K, Lorenzi PR, Milhomens SB, Sábio S

Language: English
References: 21
Page: 1-10
PDF size: 182.36 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: The cemento-ossifying fibroma is a benign bone neoplasm that affects mainly the female sex during the third or fourth decades of life. This lesion has a slow growth and the treatment is the surgical removal of the tumor, because radiotherapy is not indicated.
Objective: to describe and discuss a case of central cemento-ossifying fibroma.
Case report: A 41-year-old female patient sought dental treatment due to tooth mobility in the anterior region of the mandible. In this region of the mandible, an increase in volume was noted with a firm consistency on palpation, covered by normal mucosa, and displacement of teeth. Radiographically, the presence of an extensive lesion in this region was observed. An incisional biopsy was performed which led to the final diagnosis of central cemento-ossifying fibroma. Subsequently the tumor was completely removed. An autogenous bone graft was performed and four osseointegrated implants were installed to rehabilitate the patient. Implant-supported prostheses (lower arch) and a complete denture (upper arch) were installed to restore esthetics and function of the patient's oral cavity.
Conclusion: Despite being a benign tumor, the central cemento-ossifying fibroma caused functional and aesthetic damage to the patient and required a complex rehabilitation treatment. After approximately 5 years of tumor removal, there was no recurrence of the lesion or signs of peri-implant or periodontal diseases, evidencing the success of the treatments.


REFERENCES

  1. Katti G, Khan MM, Chaubey SS, Amena M. Cemento-ossifying fibroma of the jaw. BMJ Case Rep. 2016;2016:bcr2015214327.

  2. Woo SB. Central Cemento-Ossifying Fibroma: Primary Odontogenic or Osseous Neoplasm? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(12 Suppl):S87-93.

  3. Dominguete MH, Dominguette AA, Matos BH, Dominguete PR, León JE, Oliveira LR. Extensive presentation of central ossifying fibroma treated with conservative surgical excision. Case Rep Dent. 2014;2014:204258.

  4. Ong AH, Siar CH. Cemento-ossifying fibroma with mandibular fracture. Case report in a young patient. Aust Dent J. 1998;43(4):229-33.

  5. Naik RM, Guruprasad Y, Sujatha D, Gurudath S, Pai A, Suresh K. Giant cementoossifying fibroma of the mandible. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2014;5(1):190-4.

  6. Minichetti JC, D'Amore JC, Schwarz E. Complete oral rehabilitation of a postresection ameloblastoma patient: a clinical case report. J Oral Implantol. 2011;37(6):735-44.

  7. Michaud DS, Fu Z, Shi J, Chung M. Periodontal Disease, Tooth Loss, and Cancer Risk. Epidemiol Rev. 2017;39(1):49-58.

  8. Knutsen BM, Larheim TA, Johannessen S, Hillestad J, Solheim T, Koppang HS. Recurrent conventional cemento-ossifying fibroma of the mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2002;31(1):65-8.

  9. Silveira DT, Cardoso FO, Silva BJA, Cardoso CAA, Manzi FR. Ossifying fibroma: report on a clinical case, with the imaging and histopathological diagnosis made and treatment administered. Rev Bras Ortop. 2016;51(1):100-4.

  10. Hussain S. Evaluation of alveolar grafting with tibial graft in adolescent patients. Indian J Dent Res. 2013;24(6):659-63.

  11. Mochizuki Y, Matsushima E, Omura K. Perioperative assessment of psychological state and quality of life of head and neck cancer patients undergoing surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38(2):151-9.

  12. Tahani B, Razavi SM, Emami H, Alamchi F. Assessment of the quality of life of the patients with treated oral cancer in Iran. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;21(4):429-37.

  13. Appukuttan DA. Strategies to manage patients with dental anxiety and dental phobia: literature review. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2016;8:35-50.

  14. Riley JL, Gordan VV, Hudak-Boss SE, Fellows JL, Rindal DB, Gilbert GH, et al. Concordance between patient satisfaction and the dentist's view: findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014;145(4):355-62.

  15. Heitz-Mayfield LJ. Peri-implant diseases: diagnosis and risk indicators. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;35:214–22.

  16. Wittneben JG, Joda T, Weber HP, Brägger U. Screw retained vs. cement retained implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis. Periodontol 2000. 2017;73(1):141-51.

  17. Campbell SD, Cooper L, Craddock H, Hyde TP, Nattress B, Pavitt SH, et al. Removable partial dentures: The clinical need for innovation. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(3):273-80.

  18. Zlatarić DK, Celebić A, Valentić-Peruzović M. The effect of removable partial dentures on periodontal health of abutment and non-abutment teeth. J Periodontol. 2002;73(2):137-44

  19. Cavallaro J Jr, Greenstein G. Angled implant abutments: a practical application of available knowledge. J Am Dent Assoc. 2011;142(2):150-8.

  20. de Araújo GM, de França D G, Silva Neto J P, Barbosa G A. Passivity of conventional and CAD/CAM fabricated implant frameworks. Braz Dent J. 2015;26(3):277-83.

  21. Hsu YT, Fu JH, Al-Hezaimi K, Wang HL. Biomechanical Implant Treatment Complications: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies of Implants with at Least 1 Year of Functional Loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27(4):894-904.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com