Myopericytoma of the Lip: A Case Report of This Rare Lesion.

Myopericytomas are rare benign tumors that show a distinctive, concentric perivascular proliferation of oval to spindle-shaped myoid-appearing cells that are predominantly arranged concentrically around thin-walled vascular channels. These lesions are similar in histologic appearance to hemangiopericytomas, myofibromas, and glomus tumors. The myopericytoma is usually found in the distal extremities, but a handful of reports have shown the lesion to be present in the oral cavity. A review of the literature to date shows only 4 other reported cases of myopericytomas occurring in the lips. We describe a case of myopericytoma in the lower lip of a 42-year-old woman.

Spontaneous regeneration of bone after resection of central giant cell lesion: a case report.

There are several treatment modalities to date for central giant cell granuloma including conservative treatment and surgical treatment with often planned reconstruction of the bony defect. Spontaneous bone regeneration of mandibular defects following complete resection of mandible has rarely been reported in the literature. We report a case of spontaneous bone formation after resection of a central giant cell granuloma in the anterior mandible of a pediatric patient and the importance of maintaining the periosteum during surgical resection as a rare case report.

Pseudotumor of hemophilia in the mandible of a patient with hemophilia A.

Hemophilic pseudotumor is a rare lesion that is essentially a progressive, slowly expanding, encapsulated hematoma. It is estimated to affect 1% to 2% of severe hemophiliacs. The majority of hemophilic pseudotumors occur within soft tissues (intramuscular) and long bones of adult males. Fewer than 20 cases have been reported in the maxillofacial region. We report a rare case occurring in the mandible of a 14-year-old boy who presented with considerable expansion and displacement of teeth.

Orthognathic correction of a craniofacial deformity in a patient with a mutilated dentition: a case report.

Orthognathic surgery is routinely performed for patients with dentofacial deformity and has been conducted for more than 100 years (1). Orthognathic Surgery is a functional and esthetic surgery that affects patients self perception. Patients have noted an improvement in their facial appearance after orthognathic surgery that was associated with improvement in psychosocial adjustments (2). When the decision to move both the maxilla and the mandible is made, there are numerous variables to be considered. Among these variables are the stability of double jaw surgery, improving the masticatory function of the patient and lastly, the esthetic result. Past studies have also looked at patient concerns including temporomandibular joint symptoms, speech difficulties and problems with mastication. In one study by Rivera and colleagues who studied 143 patients pre-operatively found 71 pecent with esthetic concerns (3), 47 percent had functional concerns and 28 percent had temporomandibular joint concerns. Traditional treatment planning for two-jaw surgery uses the condyle as the point of rotation with the mandibular occlusal plane being used as a template for setting the maxillary teeth (4). This approach, which allows clockwise and counterclockwise rotation of the mandible gives stable skeletal results. Recent studies appear to indicate that long term stability is achieved mainly when rigid fixation is employed. Orthognathic surgery is only one part of the process to correct a dentofacial deformity. The process starts with the initial diagnosis, followed by a treatment plan and then patient consent. Treatment generally begins with a dental assessment to correct decay, followed by orthodontic decompensation in preparation for surgical intervention. Orthognathic surgery is followed by postoperative orthodontia to maximize the occlusal relationship. This process underscores the skill and detailed communication between orthodontist and oral surgeon, and emphasizes the crucial aspect of team approach in such complex surgical cases. We present here a report on a patient who had a mutilated dentition both in the maxilla and mandible along with a craniofacial deformity.

Grafting mandibular third molar extraction sites: a comparison of bioactive glass to a nongrafted site.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of bioactive glass used as a graft material for regeneration of bone after the removal of impacted third molars. The healing distal to the second molars was followed, with documentation of the level of radiographic osseous fill and measurement of the changes in clinical attachment levels. METHODS: Fourteen (5 male and 9 female) patients completed the study at 1 year. After surgical removal of bilateral impacted third molars, one site was grafted with bioactive glass particles (BioGran, Orthovita, Malvern, Penn). The patients were followed up at 1 and 2 weeks after surgery for signs or symptoms of infection or any other complications that may have been related to the surgical procedures. At 3, 6, and 12 months, the clinical attachment levels distal to the second molars were assessed. At 6 and 12 months, radiographs were obtained to assess the amount of osseous fill distal to the second molars. RESULTS: A split-mouth design was used to test the efficacy of the grafting materials. Clinical attachment levels in the grafted sites were significantly higher than in the nongrafted sites. There was not a significant increase in bone formation when comparing the 2 sides at 1 year. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that treatment of third molar extraction sites with bioactive glass does significantly alter the clinical attachment level but not the level of osseous fill distal to the second molars after 1 year.