Bouquot JE, Gundlach KKH. Oral exophytic lesions in 23,616 white Americans over 35 years of age. Oral Surg. 1986; 62:(3)284-291
Katsikeris N, Kakarantza-Angelopoulou E, Angelopoulos AP. Peripheral giant cell granuloma: clinicopathologic study of 224 new cases and review of 956 reported cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988; 17:(2)94-99
Priddy RW. Inflammatory hyperplasias of the oral mucosa. J Can Dent Assoc. 1992; 58:(4)311-321
Pindborg JJ, Kramer IRH, Torloni H. Histological typing of odontogenic tumors, jaw cysts and allied lesions.Geneva: World Health Organization;
Moriconi ES, Popovich LD. Alveolar pyogenic granuloma: review and report of a case. Laryngoscope. 1984; 94:(6)807-809
Vilmann A, Vilmann P, Vilmann H. Pyogenic granuloma: evaluation of oral conditions. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1986; 24:(5)376-382
Hullihen P. Case of aneurism by anastomosis of the superior maxillae. Am J Dent Sci. 1844; 4:160-162
Recurrent exophytic growth on maxillary posterior edentulous alveolar ridge – a diagnostic challenge Aditya Patney Amar A Sholapurkar Keerthilatha M Pai Monica C Solomon Dental Update 2024 39:4, 707-709.
Authors
AdityaPatney
Consultant Oral Radiologist, Mahajan Imaging Centre, Hauz Khas Enclave, New Delhi – 110016, India
Assistant Professor, Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Gregor Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – 61471
Accurate diagnosis of recurrent intra-oral exophytic lesions require a thorough history, meticulous clinical examination and the experience of assessing these lesions, because they are not commonplace. Despite this, instituting the correct diagnosis tests the skills of an oral medicine expert. Therefore, the same is all the more challenging for a general practitioner who may encounter these lesions without any significant experience. The importance of diagnosing such lesions cannot be understated, as they may represent a myriad of conditions ranging from seemingly innocuous benign pathologic processes to much more sinister ones, like oral malignancy; occasionally some of these lesions may manifest atypically. Such atypical presentations may cloud the diagnostic process. Here a case uncharacteristic of the condition it represented is reported with the aim of increasing awareness of the diagnosis of such lesions.
Clinical Relevance: When a clinician comes across recurrent exophytic intra-oral lesions, he/she must be careful, and consider all conditions in the differential diagnosis.
Article
Recurrent intra-oral exophytic lesions are uncommon.1 Recurrence of a lesion may suggest that the aetiological factor has not been addressed and, therefore, successful management will demand a more accurate diagnosis. Sometimes, a benign inflammatory lesion may be erroneously diagnosed as a serious condition. The clinician must therefore be well aware of all the possibilities that can manifest commonly or atypically.
A 60-year-old male farmer reported to our department with the chief complaint of a growth in the posterior region of the left maxillary residual alveolar ridge of 1½ years' duration. The growth developed after spontaneous exfoliation of two teeth. It was painless and gradually increased in size. He consulted a local dentist a year previously, and complete excision was carried out (histopathological details were not available with the patient). He was apparently asymptomatic thereafter but the growth recurred 8 months later and gradually increased in size to attain the current dimensions. This time it was associated with sharp shooting pain on touching and during mastication. There was no history of bleeding or pus discharging from the growth. The medical and family histories were not contributory. The patient had been a heavy smoker for 30 years. General examination revealed the patient to be in good general health. Intra-oral examination revealed a 3 x 2 cm exophytic growth associated with the left maxillary posterior residual ridge corresponding to the region of missing UL6, UL7 and UL8 (Figure 1). The lesion extended more in the buccal aspect and blended with the mucosa of the ridge on the mesial and distal aspects. It had a distinctly dimorphic appearance; the inferior aspect being creamy white to pale yellow, the buccal and palatal aspects being predominantly red in colour, with visible superficial blood vessels and interspersed blanched areas, with 3–4 areas of ulceration on the buccal surface of the mass. On palpation, the lesion was pedunculated with a broad stalk. It was readily mobile and the inferior aspect was much firmer in consistency. The ulcerations were tender and bled on palpation, but the rest of the mass was not tender.
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:
