- Email: [email protected]
Gingival eosinophilic granuloma
ABSTRACTS
OF
CURRENT
LlTERATURE
1.09
week later, a radical en bloc resection of the left half of the tongue and the left side of the neck was performed in continuity. Follow-up examination four years later showed the patient alive and healthy with no evideuce of recurrence. T. J. ‘2. Carcinoma
of the Floor
of the Mouth.
S. Cade.
Brit.
J. Hurg. 41: 225, November,
1953.
This report is based on 118 patients observed at Westminster Hospital, London, fr0111 1925 to 1951. Ninety-seven of these were treated before 1947, but eight of them were lost sight of in less than five years. Twenty-four of eighty-nine suitable for assessment remained well for five or more years. is a clinical Carcinoma of the Boor of the mouth The tumor entity only in its early stages; involvement of adjacent structures is common. is an epithelioma varying in keratinization and anaplasia. About 80 per cent of these lesions occur in men. The diff’ercntial diagnosis must rule out chronic inflammatory conditions, salivary calculi, and specific infections, and in addition attention should be drawn to four other conditions that may cause difficulty in diagnosis: (I) benign mucous-andsalivary gland tumors primarily situated in the floor of the mouth; (2) acute monocytic cervical lymph nodes; (3) metastasis in the lower jaw and adjoining gum and mouth floor silent primary growth in the tongue; and (4) a primary malignant growth from a clinically in the mouth that may be a sarcoma of the rhabdomyosarcoma type. A further point of interest in cancer of the mouth floor is the occurrence of a second and independent primary growth, sometimes many years after the appearance of the original lesion in the mouth. In the cases under review, such tumors occurred in the urinary bladder, rectum, bronchus, esophagus, or elsewhere in the mouth and pharynx. The tendency to familial occurrence was demonstrated by the occurrence in two sets of brothers (one of them twins) and in one set of sisters. Radiation therapy is the method of choice in early localized lesions. The author used mostly radium needles and teleradium, because neither intraoral radium applicators nor roentgen irradiation produced encouraging results. Local involvement of the tongue and gums requires local diathermy in addition. Involvement of bone and widespread disease in the mouth are more amenable to extensive surgical excision. Except for bone grafting, the local closure should be accomplished as quickly as possible. Tube pedicles are badly tolerated by patients with mouth cancer, and other methods, In view of the magnitude of t,he such as rotation or sliding flaps, should be employed. should be submitted to surgery. surgical procedure, only patients with a good prognosis Criteria of inoperability are (1) spread posteriorly and involvement of the pharyngeal mucosa or the pharyngeal part of the tongue; (2) adherence of the lymph nodes to the of the vascular sheath; (3) edema of the subcutaneous tissue; and (4) gross involvement T. J. C. soft tissue of the submandibular and submental areas. Gingival Easinophilic epulide a cellule
Gzanuloma eosinofile).
(Su uri case di granuloma eosinofilo a sede gengivale: Giorgiio Taddei. Arch. ital. mal. app. diger. 19: 280,
1953.
A 47.year-old woman was found to have an eosinophilic granuloma involvrng the This was first noted four months gingival margin of the lower right first premolar tooth. It gradually increased to the size of an earlier when it was about the size of a rice grain. This tumor was not painful, but interfered with mastication. A blood counl almond. A clinical diagnosis of epulis was made a.nd the revealed an eosinophilia of 8 per cent. A. two-year follow-up study mass, including the root of the first premokr, was excised. The microscopic diagnosis was that of failed to reveal any evidence of recurrence. eosinophilic granuloma, A review of the subject and various theories as to the cause of eosinophilic granulorna Trauma, infection, and allergy are considered as possible causes. In this are presented. patient the 8 per cent eosinophil count lea.ds the author to belieye that the granuloma is T. CT. c. on an allergic basis, the cause of which is not known.
OF
CURRENT
LlTERATURE
1.09
week later, a radical en bloc resection of the left half of the tongue and the left side of the neck was performed in continuity. Follow-up examination four years later showed the patient alive and healthy with no evideuce of recurrence. T. J. ‘2. Carcinoma
of the Floor
of the Mouth.
S. Cade.
Brit.
J. Hurg. 41: 225, November,
1953.
This report is based on 118 patients observed at Westminster Hospital, London, fr0111 1925 to 1951. Ninety-seven of these were treated before 1947, but eight of them were lost sight of in less than five years. Twenty-four of eighty-nine suitable for assessment remained well for five or more years. is a clinical Carcinoma of the Boor of the mouth The tumor entity only in its early stages; involvement of adjacent structures is common. is an epithelioma varying in keratinization and anaplasia. About 80 per cent of these lesions occur in men. The diff’ercntial diagnosis must rule out chronic inflammatory conditions, salivary calculi, and specific infections, and in addition attention should be drawn to four other conditions that may cause difficulty in diagnosis: (I) benign mucous-andsalivary gland tumors primarily situated in the floor of the mouth; (2) acute monocytic cervical lymph nodes; (3) metastasis in the lower jaw and adjoining gum and mouth floor silent primary growth in the tongue; and (4) a primary malignant growth from a clinically in the mouth that may be a sarcoma of the rhabdomyosarcoma type. A further point of interest in cancer of the mouth floor is the occurrence of a second and independent primary growth, sometimes many years after the appearance of the original lesion in the mouth. In the cases under review, such tumors occurred in the urinary bladder, rectum, bronchus, esophagus, or elsewhere in the mouth and pharynx. The tendency to familial occurrence was demonstrated by the occurrence in two sets of brothers (one of them twins) and in one set of sisters. Radiation therapy is the method of choice in early localized lesions. The author used mostly radium needles and teleradium, because neither intraoral radium applicators nor roentgen irradiation produced encouraging results. Local involvement of the tongue and gums requires local diathermy in addition. Involvement of bone and widespread disease in the mouth are more amenable to extensive surgical excision. Except for bone grafting, the local closure should be accomplished as quickly as possible. Tube pedicles are badly tolerated by patients with mouth cancer, and other methods, In view of the magnitude of t,he such as rotation or sliding flaps, should be employed. should be submitted to surgery. surgical procedure, only patients with a good prognosis Criteria of inoperability are (1) spread posteriorly and involvement of the pharyngeal mucosa or the pharyngeal part of the tongue; (2) adherence of the lymph nodes to the of the vascular sheath; (3) edema of the subcutaneous tissue; and (4) gross involvement T. J. C. soft tissue of the submandibular and submental areas. Gingival Easinophilic epulide a cellule
Gzanuloma eosinofile).
(Su uri case di granuloma eosinofilo a sede gengivale: Giorgiio Taddei. Arch. ital. mal. app. diger. 19: 280,
1953.
A 47.year-old woman was found to have an eosinophilic granuloma involvrng the This was first noted four months gingival margin of the lower right first premolar tooth. It gradually increased to the size of an earlier when it was about the size of a rice grain. This tumor was not painful, but interfered with mastication. A blood counl almond. A clinical diagnosis of epulis was made a.nd the revealed an eosinophilia of 8 per cent. A. two-year follow-up study mass, including the root of the first premokr, was excised. The microscopic diagnosis was that of failed to reveal any evidence of recurrence. eosinophilic granuloma, A review of the subject and various theories as to the cause of eosinophilic granulorna Trauma, infection, and allergy are considered as possible causes. In this are presented. patient the 8 per cent eosinophil count lea.ds the author to belieye that the granuloma is T. CT. c. on an allergic basis, the cause of which is not known.