Clear cell odontogenic carcinoma: case report with immunohistochemical findings adding support to the challenging diagnosis

Clear cell odontogenic carcinoma (CCOC) is a rare odontogenic tumor associated with aggressive clinical behavior, metastasis, and low survival. We report a case of CCOC affecting the mandible of a 39-year-old man. The tumor presented a biphasic pattern composed of clear cell nests intermingled with eosinophilic cells and separated by collagenous stroma. Immunoreactivity to cytokeratin (CK), specifically AE1/AE3 and CK 8, 14, 18, and 19 was found, as well as to epithelial membrane antigen (EMA). The tumor cells were negative for S100 protein, CK 13, vimentin, smooth muscle actin, laminin and type IV collagen. Low labeling indices for the proliferation markers Ki-67 and proliferating cell nuclear antigen and to p53 protein might predict a favorable prognosis for the lesion. A surgical resection was performed, followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. A 2-year follow-up has shown no signs of recurrence. The significance of histochemical and immunohistochemical resources in the correct diagnosis of CCOC is analyzed.

Photoelastic Study of the Support Structures of Distal-Extension Removable Partial Dentures

Purpose: The double system of support, in which the distal-extension removable partial denture adapts, causes inadequate stress around abutment teeth, increasing the possibility of unequal bone resorption. Several ways to reduce or more adequately distribute the stress between abutment teeth and residual ridges have been reported; however, there are no definitive answers to the problem. The purpose of this study was to analyze, by means of photoelasticity, the most favorable stress distribution using three retainers: T bar, rest, proximal plate, I bar (RPI), and circumferential with mesialized rest. Materials and Methods: Three photoelastic models were made simulating a Kennedy Class II inferior arch. Fifteen dentures with long saddles, five of each design, were adjusted to the photoelastic patterns and submitted first to uniformly distributed load, and then to a load localized on the last artificial tooth. The saddles were then shortened and the tests repeated. The quantitative and qualitative analyses of stress intensity were done manually and by photography, respectively. For intragroup analyses the Wilcoxon test for paired samples was used, while for intergroup analyses Friedman and Wilcoxon tests were used to better identify the differences (p < 0.05). Results: The RPI retainer, followed by the T bar, demonstrated the best distribution of load between teeth and residual ridge. The circumferential retainer caused greater concentration of stress between dental apexes. Stress distribution was influenced by the type of retainer, the length of the saddle, and the manner of load application. Conclusions: The long saddles and the uniformly distributed loads demonstrated better distribution of stress on support structures.