|Year : 2013 | Volume
| Issue : 2 | Page : 232-234
Management of unicystic ameloblastoma of the mandible in a 5-year old child
Ongkila Bhutia1, Ajoy Roychoudhury1, Ankit Arora1, Saumya Mallick2
1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
2 Department of Pathology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
|Date of Web Publication||21-Feb-2014|
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi - 110 029
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Unicystic ameloblastoma rarely seen in first decade of life. This tumour usually appears very similar to a non-neoplastic odontogenic cyst and is frequently clinically misdiagnosed as dentigerous cyst. The distinction from dentigerous cyst is important as unicystic ameloblastoma (UA) unlike dentigerous cyst needs different treatment approach and long term follow-up due to its chances of recurrence. This report highlights the importance of clinical examination in the diagnosis and management of UA in a 5 year old boy.
Keywords: Dentigerous cyst, non-neoplastic odontogenic tumor, unicystic ameloblastoma
|How to cite this article:|
Bhutia O, Roychoudhury A, Arora A, Mallick S. Management of unicystic ameloblastoma of the mandible in a 5-year old child. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2013;4:232-4
|How to cite this URL:|
Bhutia O, Roychoudhury A, Arora A, Mallick S. Management of unicystic ameloblastoma of the mandible in a 5-year old child. Natl J Maxillofac Surg [serial online] 2013 [cited 2021 Aug 4];4:232-4. Available from: https://www.njms.in/text.asp?2013/4/2/232/127658
| Introduction|| |
Unicystic ameloblastoma (UA) was first described by Robinson and Martinez in 1977 as a special type of ameloblastoma.  UA usually appears very similar to a non-neoplastic odontogenic cyst , and is frequently clinically misdiagnosed as dentigerous cyst and odontogenic keratocyst hence, histological confirmation is mandatory from the management point of view. This report highlights the importance of clinical and radiographic features in the diagnosis and management of UA in a 5-year-old boy.
| Case Report|| |
A 5-year-old boy presented to our unit Center for Dental Education and Research, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India with a painless hard swelling in the lower chin region of 3 months duration. Extra oral examination revealed a facial asymmetry with diffuse swelling over the chin region. Swelling was found to be approximately 2 cm × 2 cm in size, overlying skin was normal in color and texture with no evidence of sinus/fistula.
Intra oral examination revealed adequate mouth opening with intact deciduous dentition. Swelling was extended from right deciduous molar to left canine. Mucosa overlying was normal in color. Swelling was non-tender, non-pulsatile, bony hard, non-fluctuant, non-compressible on palpation with expansion of both, buccal as well as lingual cortical plates and aspiration from the swelling yielded cystic color fluid.
Panoramic radiographic revealed that unilocular well-defined radiolucent lesion extending from lower deciduous first mandibular molar to right lower canine with evidence of roots resorption [Figure 1]. All other blood investigations were within the normal limit.
|Figure 1: Pre-operative panoramic radiograph showing radiolucent lesion in the right side of the mandible and resorption of the roots of the teeth|
Click here to view
On the basis of lingual cortical bone expansion, presence of cystic fluid on aspiration and evident of root resorption of the teeth in the panorex, we made the provisional diagnosis of UA. Treatment was planned according to UA.
Enucleation of the cyst with extraction of the involved teeth followed by application of Carnoy's solution for 3 min over the cavity was planned under general anesthesia (GA).
Treatment performed - patient was taken under GA. Planned treatment procedure was carried out successfully. Specimen obtained was sent for histopathological examination.
Histopathology report of the specimen revealed that type 1 UA as per the histological criteria defined by Ackerman et al. [Figure 2]a and b.
|Figure 2: (a) Discrete epithelial lines in a connective tissue stroma (H and E, ×10), (b) Discrete follicles with a similarity to the stellate reticulum of enamel with a varying quantity of connective tissue stroma.(H and E, ×40)|
Click here to view
Patient has been on regular follow-up since 2 years, patient is doing well with no signs of recurrence [Figure 3].
|Figure 3: Post-operative panoramic radiograph showing bone regeneration in the affected area and movement of tooth buds into the regenerated bone at 2 years follow-up period|
Click here to view
| Discussion|| |
Ameloblastoma is rare before the age of 10 years. According to statistical analysis of 1036 cases of ameloblastoma collected from the literature by Small and Waldron, only 2% of cases occur before 10 years of age.  The UA is considered a variant of the solid or multicystic ameloblastoma, accounting for 6% to 15% of all intra osseous ameloblastomas. 
It is more difficult to distinguish dentigerous cysts from UA clinically. Presence of lingual cortical plate expansion, cystic fluid on aspiration and presence of root resorption of teeth in panoramic radiograph helped us in making the preoperative diagnosis of UA over the dentigerous cyst without incisional biopsy (which requires GA in the child).
Histopathological features of the tumor showed type 1 (tumor confined to the luminal surface of the cyst) UA as per the histological criteria defined by Ackerman et al.
Treatment modality of UA is being divided into following types - enucleation alone yielded the highest recurrence rate among all treatments (30.5%). , Marsupialization together with other treatments resulted in an 18% of recurrence rate.  A more conservative approach is enucleation with application of Carnoy's solution and the extraction of closely related adjacent teeth has resulted in a recurrence rate of 16%.  The success of the application of Carnoy's solution after enucleation was thought to be due to both its penetration and fixation action. The usual practice is to apply the solution with cotton applicators or ribbon gauze for 3-5 min, rinse the bony cavity. The recurrence rate could even lower than reported, if the closely related teeth with tumor are extracted. Because in an attempt to preserve the tooth without damage, tumor remnants may be left around the tooth apex or root and these may lead to recurrence 
We carried out the same procedure in the case i.e. enucleation followed by application of Carnoy's solution for 3 min, extraction of all involved teeth and close follow-up.
Second surgery (i.e. incisional biopsy followed by definitive treatment) under GA in the child was not required due to proper preoperative planning of the case.
At 2 years follow-up, patient has been doing well with no signs of recurrence.
| References|| |
|1.||Robinson L, Martinez MG. Unicystic ameloblastoma: A prognostically distinct entity. Cancer 1977;40:2278-85. |
|2.||Abrams AM, Melrose RJ, Handlers JP. Oral pathology: Unicystic ameloblastoma. J Calif Dent Assoc 1990;18:76-7. |
|3.||Small IA, Waldron CA. Ameloblastomas of the jaws. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1955;8:281-97. |
|4.||Ackermann GL, Altini M, Shear M. The unicystic ameloblastoma: A clinicopathological study of 57 cases. J Oral Pathol 1988;17:541-6. |
|5.||Gardner DG, Corio RL. Plexiform unicystic ameloblastoma. A variant of ameloblastoma with a low-recurrence rate after enucleation. Cancer 1984;53:1730-5. |
|6.||Nakamura N, Higuchi Y, Tashiro H, Ohishi M. Marsupialization of cystic ameloblastoma: A clinical and histopathologic study of the growth characteristics before and after marsupialization. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;53:748-54. |
|7.||Lee PK, Samman N, Ng IO. Unicystic ameloblastoma - Use of Carnoy's solution after enucleation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;33:263-7. |
|8.||Culter E, Zollinger R. Sclerosing solution in the treatment of cysts and fistulae. Am J Surg 1993;19:411-8. |
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]
|This article has been cited by|
||Role of Carnoyęs solution as treatment adjunct in jaw lesions other than odontogenic keratocyst: a systematic review
| ||B. Lal,R.D. Kumar,R. Alagarsamy,D. Shanmuga Sundaram,O. Bhutia,A. Roychoudhury |
| ||British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2021; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Unicystic Ameloblastoma of Mandible- Imaging Features: A Case Report and Literature Review
| ||Archana Pokala,Avinash Tejasvi ML,Geetha Paramkusam,Revath Vyas,Harsha Bhayya,Pavani Donempudi |
| ||Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology. 2020; 41(03): 401 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Conservative Management of Unicystic Ameloblastoma in Young Patients: A Prospective Single-Center Trial and Review of Literature
| ||Mitsu Meshram,Lalit Sagarka,Jigar Dhuvad,Sonal Anchlia,Siddharth Vyas,Harsh Shah |
| ||Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery. 2016; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|