You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Reminder of important clinical lesson
CASE REPORT
Hybrid ameloblastoma: a mystified histopathological entity
  1. Ravinder Singh1,
  2. Monika Gupta2,
  3. Shailja Chatterjee3 and
  4. Karandeep Singh Arora1
  1. 1 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Maharishi Markandeshwar College of Dental Sciences and Research, Ambala, Haryana, India
  2. 2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Maharishi Markandeshwar College of Dental Sciences and Research, Ambala, Haryana, India
  3. 3 Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Maharishi Markandeshwar College of Dental Sciences and Research, Ambala, Haryana, India
  1. Correspondence to Dr Karandeep Singh Arora, drkaranarora{at}yahoo.com

Abstract

Ameloblastoma a benign neoplasm of the maxillofacial region has been divided into various histopathological types by WHO. A more complex and confusing type includes hybrid type, which as the name suggest include more than two variants mostly histopathological. Various authors have reported cases of this type but the exact histopathological features are still unclear and each case that is being reported add to the literature, which further strengthens its histopathological feature. Also, this is a lesion whose clinical and radiographical features are similar to all the variants and a definitive diagnosis is achieved by histopathology only. Here, we present a case of hybrid ameloblastoma with striking and unique histopathological features.

  • dentistry and oral medicine
  • pathology

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2019-229834

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors RS was responsible for clinical and radiographical evaluation. SC was responsible for histopathological reporting of the biopsy sample. MG was responsible for carrying out the surgical procedure. KSA was responsible for concept, design, literature, content, manuscript editing and reviewing. Further, all the authors reviewed and approved the final draft of the manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.