LITERATURE REVIEW & CASE REPORT : THE CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT OF UNICYSTIC AMELOBLASTOMA

단방성 법랑아세포종의 보존적 수술에 관한 증례보고 및 문헌고찰

  • Shin, Min-Young (Dept. of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University) ;
  • Lee, Hyuk-Kee (Dept. of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University) ;
  • Choi, Je-Won (Dept. of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University) ;
  • Shin, Sung-Soo (Dept. of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University) ;
  • Park, Yang-Ho (Dept. of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University) ;
  • Park, Jun-Woo (Dept. of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, Hallym University)
  • 신민영 (한림대학교 의과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 이혁기 (한림대학교 의과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 최제원 (한림대학교 의과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 신성수 (한림대학교 의과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 박양호 (한림대학교 의과대학 구강악안면외과학교실) ;
  • 박준우 (한림대학교 의과대학 구강악안면외과학교실)
  • Published : 2005.02.28

Abstract

An Ameloblastoma is one of the most common odontogenic tumors. The treatment of ameloblastoma has been controversial because of this disease entity as a slow-growing, locally invasive tumor with high rate of recurrence. Recurrence rate of ameloblastoma are reported 15% to 25% after radical treatment and 75% to 90% after conservative treatment. On the other hand, Robinson and Gardner reported that the recurrence rate after conservative treatment of unicystic ameloblastoma was lower than those of multicystic or solid lesion. In this report, what we want to show is to review the articles to find out pros and cons of conservative treatment of ameloblastoma. In addition we would like to discuss which requies conservative treatment or radical treatment are more acceptable through our case report.

Keywords

References

  1. Shatkin S, Hoffmeister FS: Ameloblastoma: a rational approach to therapy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1965;20:421-435 https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(65)90231-8
  2. Mehlisch DR, Dahlin DC, Masson JK: Ameloblastoma: a clinicopathologic report . J Oral Surg 1972;30:9-22
  3. Sehdev MK, Huvos AG, Strong EW, Gerold FP, Willis GW: Ameloblastoma of maxilla and mandible. Cancer 1974;33:324-333 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197402)33:2<324::AID-CNCR2820330205>3.0.CO;2-U
  4. Robinson L, Martinez MG: Unicystic ameloblastoma : a prognostically distinct entity. Cancer 1977;40:2278-2285 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197711)40:5<2278::AID-CNCR2820400539>3.0.CO;2-L
  5. Gardner DG, Corio RL: Plexiform unicystic ameloblastoma. A variant of ameloblastoma with a low-recurrene rate after enucleation. Cancer 1984;53:1730-1735 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19840415)53:8<1730::AID-CNCR2820530819>3.0.CO;2-U
  6. Neville BW, Damm DD, Allen CM, Bouquot JE: Oral & maxillofacial pathology 2nd edition. 611-619
  7. Gardner DG: The treatment of ameloblastoma based on pathologic and anatomic principle. Cancer 1980;46:2514-2519 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19801201)46:11<2514::AID-CNCR2820461133>3.0.CO;2-9
  8. Crawley WA, Levin LS: Treatment of the ameloblastoma. A controversy. Cancer1978;42:357-363 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197807)42:1<357::AID-CNCR2820420154>3.0.CO;2-H
  9. Muller H, Slootweg PJ: The ameloblastoma, the controversial approach to therapy. J Maxillofac Surg 1985;13:79-84 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0503(85)80021-7
  10. Williams TP: Management of ameloblastoma: A changing perspective. J Oral Surg 1993;51:1064-1070 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(10)80440-9
  11. Eversole LR, Leider AS, Strub D: Radiographic characteristic of cystogenic ameloblastoma. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1984;57:572-577 https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(84)90320-7
  12. Oliatan AA, Adekeye EO: Unicystic ameloblastoma of the mandible: A long-term follow-up. J oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;55:345-348 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90122-1
  13. Nakamura N, Higuchi Y, Mitsuyasu T: Comparison of long-term result between different approaches to ameloblastoma. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 2002;93:13-20 https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2002.119517