IADR Abstract Archives
A microscopic finding in odontogenic ghost cell lesions.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to report a microscopic finding in odontogenic ghost cell lesions.
Methods: Sixty-one odontogenic ghost cell lesions were retrieved from cases filed in the archives of the Surgical Pathology Laboratory of the Oral Pathology Department over a 59 year period (1960-2019). Their microscopic features were analyzed and recorded. Histochemical and immunohistochemical techniques were used. Clinical-radiographic data available on the files were analyzed.
Results: Fifty-four cases (89%) were calcifying odontogenic cyst, seven cases (11%) were dentinogenic ghost cell tumor; there were no cases of odontogenic ghost cell carcinoma. In two cases, one calcifying odontogenic cyst and one dentinogenic ghost cell tumor, granular cells were found in the ameloblastic and/or ameloblastomatous epithelium close to ghost cells. The granular cells were P.A.S. positive; both cases expressed AE1 AE3, CD68, S100, and the dentinogenic ghost cell tumor expressed Vimentin. Immunoreactions with p63 and CD1a were negative. Both cases were located in the mandible; the calcifying odontogenic cyst was found in a 44-year-old man, and the dentinogenic ghost cell tumor was found in an 84-year-old woman.
Conclusions: We report the presence of granular cells in odontogenic ghost cell lesions. This is the first report of granular cells in calcifying odontogenic cyst and the third of granular cells in dentinogenic ghost cell tumor. Granular cells showed hybrid immunohistochemical features (epithelial, macrophagic, neural). The pathologies included in this group are rare and vary widely in presentation, and thus pose a challenge for characterization and diagnosis.
Methods: Sixty-one odontogenic ghost cell lesions were retrieved from cases filed in the archives of the Surgical Pathology Laboratory of the Oral Pathology Department over a 59 year period (1960-2019). Their microscopic features were analyzed and recorded. Histochemical and immunohistochemical techniques were used. Clinical-radiographic data available on the files were analyzed.
Results: Fifty-four cases (89%) were calcifying odontogenic cyst, seven cases (11%) were dentinogenic ghost cell tumor; there were no cases of odontogenic ghost cell carcinoma. In two cases, one calcifying odontogenic cyst and one dentinogenic ghost cell tumor, granular cells were found in the ameloblastic and/or ameloblastomatous epithelium close to ghost cells. The granular cells were P.A.S. positive; both cases expressed AE1 AE3, CD68, S100, and the dentinogenic ghost cell tumor expressed Vimentin. Immunoreactions with p63 and CD1a were negative. Both cases were located in the mandible; the calcifying odontogenic cyst was found in a 44-year-old man, and the dentinogenic ghost cell tumor was found in an 84-year-old woman.
Conclusions: We report the presence of granular cells in odontogenic ghost cell lesions. This is the first report of granular cells in calcifying odontogenic cyst and the third of granular cells in dentinogenic ghost cell tumor. Granular cells showed hybrid immunohistochemical features (epithelial, macrophagic, neural). The pathologies included in this group are rare and vary widely in presentation, and thus pose a challenge for characterization and diagnosis.