ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2019
Peri-implant peripheral giant cell lesions: report of 13 new cases and comparative histological and immunohistochemical analysis with peripheral and central giant cell lesions.
Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Relevance and Timing of Implant-Driven Rehabilitation in Central Giant Cell Granuloma Cases-A Scoping Review.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Article
- OralImmunoAnalyser: a software tool for immunohistochemical assessment of oral leukoplakia using image segmentation and classification models.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- An analysis of the prevalence of peripheral giant cell granuloma and pyogenic granuloma in relation to a dental implant.BMC oral health · 2021Article
- Peripheral Giant Cell Granuloma of the Jaws as First Sign of Primary Hyperparathyroidism: A Case Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew cases or peri-implant peripheral giant cell lesions (PGCL) have been reported in the literature. The aim of this study was to report 13 new cases of peri-implant PGCL and compare the expression of smooth muscle actin, Bcl-2 protein, GLUT-1, CD68, osteoprotegerin, receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B, Ki-67 and CD34 in these cases with PGCL and central giant cell lesions (CGCL). MATERIAL AND
methodsClinical data were retrieved from the laboratory records and histological analysis was performed using HE-stained slides. Immunohistochemical reactions for the above mentioned antibodies were performed and digitally scored.
resultsPeri-implant PGCL mostly affected the posterior mandible of adult females. CD68 and Bcl-2 expressions were higher in conventional PGCL and CGCL than in peri-implant PGCL ( p=0.033 for CD68 and p<0.0001 for Bcl-2). Microvessel density was higher in conventional peripheral than in central and peri-implant PGCL ( p=0.002). Proliferative index of the mononuclear cells showed no statistically significant differences comparing the three groups but it was higher in peri-implant PGCL.
conclusionsThe current study demonstrated that peri-implant PGCL is more common in the posterior mandible of adult females. There were some differences in microvessel density, proliferative activity and expression of CD68 and Bcl-2 among conventional PGCL, peri-implant and CGCL. Further studies are encouraged to better understand these early findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.