ArticleBMC oral health2025
Histopathological and radiographic characteristics of central giant cell granulomas: a retrospective study of 45 cases.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study is to contribute to the existing literature by providing a comprehensive analysis of the clinical, radiological, and histopathological features of central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) cases.
methodsThe study included 45 cases (30 females, 15 males) of CGCG, with a mean age of 36.6 years. Radiological evaluations were conducted using panoramic imaging and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Data on clinical presentations, radiographic findings, histopathological features, and treatment modalities were analyzed to assess key patterns and variations.
resultsA total of 45 cases (30 female, 15 male) of CGCG were analyzed, with the majority of lesions affecting the posterior regions of the mandible. The most common radiographic features included unilocular lesions, borders that were partly well-defined with a scalloped margin, mixed density with internal trabecula, wispy septa, and cortical bone perforation. Swelling and pain were reported in 60% and 17% of the cases, respectively. Enucleation and curettage were mostly preferred as a treatment option while intralesional corticosteroid injections were done in eight cases. Although no statistically significant differences were observed between aggressive and non-aggressive CGCG in the histopathologically evaluated parameters, the aggressive type showed a slight tendency to have a higher number of giant cells and nuclei, along with mildly increased inflammatory infiltration.
conclusionsCBCT imaging was more effective in evaluating extent of the lesion, internal architecture, and cortical involvement, revealing a relatively high prevalence of cortical bone perforation and root resorption. These findings underscore the importance of integrating CBCT with clinical, radiographic, and histopathological data to ensure accurate diagnosis and effective management of CGCG.
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.