A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Central giant cell granulomas of the jaws: retrospective radiographic analysis of 13 patients. | LitMetric

Central giant cell granulomas of the jaws: retrospective radiographic analysis of 13 patients.

Oral Radiol

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, 38039, Melikgazi, Kayseri, Turkey.

Published: January 2020

Objective: This study was performed to retrospectively analyse the imaging features of 13 patients with central giant cell granulomas (CGCGs) examined at a single institution.

Methods: The orthopantomography and cone beam computed tomography images of 13 patients histopathologically diagnosed with CGCGs were retrospectively analysed. Patients aged > 30 years underwent measurement of their calcium and parathyroid hormone levels. No cases of hyperparathyroidism were identified in the study group.

Results: Thirteen lesions of 13 patients (7 female, 6 male) were included in this study. The patients' ages ranged from 8 to 79 years at the time of presentation. Among the 13 lesions, 2 (15.4%) were in the maxilla and 11 (84.6%) were in the mandible. Eight lesions (61.5%) were unilocular and 5 lesions (38.5%) were multilocular with a soap bubble appearance. Three of the lesions were > 5 cm, and the remaining ten lesions were < 5 cm; five of these smaller lesions met at least three of the aggressiveness criteria. Therefore, according to these criteria, eight aggressive and five non-aggressive CGCGs were examined in this series.

Conclusion: The distinction between aggressive and non-aggressive CGCGs is extremely important because it leads to changes in the individual treatment protocol that is applied. It may be possible to minimise recurrence after treatment by detecting findings such as cortical perforation or thinning, cortical bone expansion, and the presence of root resorption.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11282-019-00380-7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

central giant
8
giant cell
8
cell granulomas
8
lesions
6
patients
5
granulomas jaws
4
jaws retrospective
4
retrospective radiographic
4
radiographic analysis
4
analysis patients
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!