Mural Unicystic Ameloblastoma of the Mandible: A Case Report

TL;DR

This case report describes a rare and aggressive type of ameloblastoma in the jaw, emphasizing the need for accurate diagnosis and multidisciplinary treatment.

Contribution

The paper presents a rare case of mural unicystic ameloblastoma with unique radiographic features and highlights the importance of histological subtyping.

Findings

The lesion showed scalloped borders and displacement of the inferior alveolar canal.

Biopsy confirmed mural unicystic ameloblastoma without associated tooth impaction.

The case highlights variable radiographic presentations and the need for a multidisciplinary approach.

Abstract

Background and Clinical Significance: Among the odontogenic tumors, ameloblastoma is one of the most notorious, although it remains relatively rare, accounting for approximately one percent of all oral tumors. This neoplasm, derived from odontogenic epithelium, may arise from the developing enamel organ, epithelial cell rests of dental lamina, epithelial lining of odontogenic cysts, and basal cells of oral epithelium. This is a case presentation of a mural unicystic ameloblastoma, the most aggressive subtype and the one with the highest chance of recurrence. Case Presentation: A patient was referred by his dentist for root canal treatment at the Emergency Dental Clinic of Boston University. The patient complained of mandibular numbness. A panoramic radiograph was acquired, revealing a radiolucent lesion in the right mandible. Clinical examination detected a soft swelling perforating the buccal cortex in the area of #27–#30. A Cone-Beam CT (CBCT) was acquired in the Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology Clinic revealing a well-defined, partially corticated entity in the periapical area of teeth #27 through #30, with evidence of scalloping borders. The internal structure was unilocular and uniformly low-density. The entity caused interruption of the lamina dura of the associated teeth and inferior displacement of the inferior alveolar canal. Differential diagnoses included unicystic ameloblastoma (UA) and central giant cell granuloma as a second less likely diagnosis. An incisional biopsy was performed for further evaluation. Biopsy confirmed UA with mural involvement. Conclusions: UAs typically exhibit less aggressive behavior. However, cases like this one, where mural involvement is noted and no associated impaction is detected, underline the possibility of variable radiographic presentation and the significance of a multidisciplinary approach in correct diagnosis and treatment. Histological subtyping is crucial for guiding treatment.

Figures