|Year : 2019 | Volume
| Issue : 3 | Page : 422-428
Benign cementoblastoma involving left deciduous first molar: A case report and review of literature
Jigna Pathak1, Rashmi Maruti Hosalkar1, Sunil Sidana2, Niharika Swain1, Shilpa Patel1
1 Deparment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, MGM's Dental College and Hospital, Navi-Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
2 Deparment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, MGM's Dental College and Hospital, Navi-Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
|Date of Submission||18-Jun-2019|
|Date of Acceptance||19-Jul-2019|
|Date of Web Publication||19-Dec-2019|
Deparment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, MGM's Dental College and Hospital, Navi-Mumbai, Maharashtra
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Cementoblastoma, a benign mesenchymal odontogenic neoplasm is derived from ectomesenchymal cells of the periodontium. Cementoblastomas associated with primary teeth are extremely rare as permanent mandibular first molars are mostly affected. Only 17 cases of those associated with deciduous dentition have been reported so far. The present case report describes a true cementoblastoma of an 8-year-old male child in relation to the left first primary mandibular molar along with emphasis on differential diagnosis.
Keywords: Cementoblastoma, deciduous dentition, differential diagnosis, odontogenic neoplasm
|How to cite this article:|
Pathak J, Hosalkar RM, Sidana S, Swain N, Patel S. Benign cementoblastoma involving left deciduous first molar: A case report and review of literature. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 2019;23:422-8
|How to cite this URL:|
Pathak J, Hosalkar RM, Sidana S, Swain N, Patel S. Benign cementoblastoma involving left deciduous first molar: A case report and review of literature. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol [serial online] 2019 [cited 2020 Jan 23];23:422-8. Available from: http://www.jomfp.in/text.asp?2019/23/3/422/273488
| Introduction|| |
Cementoblastoma is a slow-growing, benign odontogenic neoplasm of mesenchymal origin, with unlimited growth potential and is derived from ectomesenchymal cells of the periodontium including cementoblasts. Cementoblastoma was first described by Dewey in 1927 and was recognized first by Noeberg  in 1930. They are commonly seen in children and young adults; males are more frequently affected than females, with more occurrences in mandible than maxilla. Radiographically, benign cementoblastoma appears as a well-defined radio-opacity with a radiolucent peripheral zone. The growth rate for cementoblastoma is estimated to be 0.5 cm/year. The histological features of cementoblastoma include cementum-like tissue with numerous reversal lines, and between these mineralized and trabecular hard tissues, fibrovascular tissue with cementoblast-like cells is present along with multinucleated giant cells. The treatment of choice is complete removal of the lesion with extraction of associated tooth, followed by thorough curettage and peripheral ostectomy. The recurrence rate is 21.7%–37.1%. It is a rare tumor with <300 cases ever reported in literature. Cementoblastoma is more commonly associated with permanent mandibular first molars with deciduous teeth being rarely involved. So far, only 17 cases ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, involving deciduous dentition have been reported [Table 1]. The present case report describes a true cementoblastoma in relation to the left first primary mandibular molar in an 8-year-old child along with emphasis on differential diagnosis.
|Table 1: Demographic factors of cementoblastoma cases reported from 1965 to 2018|
Click here to view
| Case Report|| |
An 8-year-old healthy male child reported to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology of our institute with a chief complaint of pain and mild swelling in the left body of the mandible which had been increasing in size for the past 2 months. On clinical examination, no extraoral swelling was present in lower one-third of the face. Mild intraoral swelling with obliteration of the vestibular space was associated with deciduous mandibular left first molar. The swelling was diffuse and hard in consistency, with expansion of buccal cortex. Tenderness on palpation was noticed. Overlying mucosa was normal with no ulceration or purulent discharge. No carious teeth were seen in the region.
Radiological examination using cone beam computed tomography revealed a localized mixed radio-opaque–radiolucent lesion in the buccal aspect extending from the distal aspect of 32 to the mesial aspect of developing 34 [Figure 1]a and [Figure 1]b. The lesion was surrounded by a thin, uniform radiolucent line [Figure 2]. It was involving the periapices of 74 and was in continuity with the roots of the same [Figure 3]. It extended inferiorly up to the middle third level of the coronal portion of the developing 33. The approximate maximum dimensions of the lesion were 11.9 mm × 13.8 mm × 16 mm [Figure 4]. Considering the clinical and radiographical findings, differential diagnosis of the lesion included odontogenic tumor, fibro-osseous lesion or hypercementosis. An excisional biopsy was performed for final diagnosis.
|Figure 1: Cone beam computed tomography showing localized mixed radio-opaque–radiolucent lesion in the buccal aspect extending from the distal aspect of 32 to the mesial aspect of developing 34. (a) Axial view (b) Panoramic view|
Click here to view
|Figure 2: Cone beam computed tomography showing lesion surrounded by a peripheral radiolucency (yellow arrows)|
Click here to view
|Figure 3: Cone beam computed tomography radio-opacity involving the periapices of 74 and is in continuity with the roots of the same (yellow arrows)|
Click here to view
|Figure 4: Cone beam computed tomography approximate maximum dimensions of the lesion (11.9 mm × 13.8 mm)|
Click here to view
The gross specimen included multiple bits of hard tissues and deciduous mandibular first molar. Hematoxylin and eosin stained sections showed sheets of cementum-like tissue with prominent reversal lines [Figure 5]. Areas of fibrovascular connective tissue interspersed between cementum like masses [Figure 6]. At the periphery of the lesion, radiating columns of cellular unmineralized cementoid tissue was evident [Figure 7]. Multinucleated giant cells and plump cementoblasts were also seen [Figure 8]. Prominent and numerous basophilic reversal lines were appreciable [Figure 9]. On basis of clinical, radiological and histopathological correlation, a diagnosis of cementoblastoma was given. The patient is on follow up since last 6 months and is free of disease.
|Figure 5: Photomicrograph of hematoxylin and eosin stained decalcified sections show sheets of cementum like tissue with prominent reversal lines (H&E stain, ×4)|
Click here to view
|Figure 6: Photomicrograph of hematoxylin and eosin stained decalcified sections show areas of fibrovascular connective tissue interspersed between cementum like masses (H&E stain, ×10)|
Click here to view
|Figure 7: Photomicrograph of hematoxylin and eosin stained decalcified sections show radiating columns of cellular unmineralized cementoid tissue at the periphery of the lesion (H&E stain, ×10)|
Click here to view
|Figure 8: Photomicrograph of hematoxylin and eosin stained decalcified sections show multinucleated giant cells and plump cementoblasts (H&E stain, ×40)|
Click here to view
|Figure 9: Photomicrograph of hematoxylin and eosin stained decalcified sections show prominent and numerous basophilic reversal lines (H&E stain, ×40)|
Click here to view
| Discussion|| |
Cementoblastoma is a rare lesion that represents <1% of the odontogenic tumors. Their prevalence among all odontogenic tumors has been reported to vary from 0.69% to 8%.,,,,, It is more common in young patients, with about 50% of them arising under the age of 20 years. Females (78.5%) are more commonly affected than males (21.5%). Most cementoblastomas are closely allied to and partly surround a root or roots of a single erupted permanent tooth. It most commonly occurs in the mandibular molar–premolar region. Primary teeth are very rarely affected. Mandibular arch (93%) is more commonly involved than the maxillary arch (7%). Cementoblastoma was commonly seen on the right side (71.5%) of mandibular arch, followed by the left side of the mandibular arch (21.5%) and the right side of the maxillary molar region (7%), the most common tooth affected being right mandibular second molar (71%). The present case is in accordance with the literature and is only the 18th case report so far, associated with the primary molar.
Painful swelling at the buccal and lingual/palatal aspect of the alveolar ridges is the most common symptom associated with cementoblastoma. Occasionally, it may be asymptomatic. The involved tooth remains vital. Cortical expansion and facial asymmetry are also common findings. Lower lip paresthesia or a pathologic fracture of the mandible is rarely reported. In the present case, the patient complained of pain and mild swelling in the lower left posterior region.
Cementoblastoma is derived from the functional cementoblasts of odontogenic ectomesenchyme that lay down cementum on the tooth root. Cementoblastoma is continuous with the cemental layer of the apical third of the tooth root and remains separated from bone by a continuation of the periodontal ligament (PDL), all of which supports an odontogenic origin. Pathogenesis of cementoblastoma progresses in three stages with first stage being periapical osteolysis followed by cementoblastic stage and finally with calcification and maturation. Radiographically, it appears as a well-defined radio-opacity surrounded by a radiolucent periphery and is continuous with the apical one-third of the root and PDL. The histopathological features of cementoblastoma include sheets of cementum-like material continuous with the tooth root. The proliferating cementum is lined by numerous plump cementoblasts. Cementoblasts are also present along with prominent reversal lines. Some of the cemental material maybe noncalcified, particularly at the periphery of the mass the tumor and often arranged in struts perpendicular to the capsule. The fibrous stroma is highly vascular. The present case meets the radiological and histopathological criteria of a benign cementoblastoma.
Osteoblastoma, odontoma, focal cement osseous dysplasia (FCOD), condensing osteitis and hypercementosis could be considered in differential diagnosis of benign cementoblastoma.,, An attempt has been made to compare and contrast aforementioned lesions with benign cementoblastoma on clinical, radiological and histopathological features [Table 2].
The treatment includes removal of the tumor en masse with the affected tooth. If the tumor is incompletely removed, the recurrence rate is as high as 37.1%. The prognosis of the tumor is excellent if it is removed in toto as then there are very minimal chances of recurrence. In the present case also, the lesion was excised along with the extraction of primary first molar and a 6-month follow-up showed no recurrence. There are no reported cases of malignant transformation in benign cementoblastoma till date.
| Conclusion|| |
The occurrence of cementoblastoma in association with primary teeth is extremely rare (seriously rare). However, it is important to include these lesions in the differential diagnosis of bony lesions in association with tooth roots. Although there are no reported cases of malignant transformation of benign cementoblastoma (rarely serious), there are reported cases in literature exhibiting signs of local aggressiveness and destruction. Also, there seems to be difficulty many a times in differentiating bone from cementum and hence distinguishing cementum-related lesions (benign cementoblastoma, hypercementosis and cement ossifying fibroma) from those related to bone (FCOD, condensing osteitis, cement ossifying fibroma and osteoblastoma). Thus, previous study showing modified Gallego Stain in distinguishing cementum (brilliant red) from bone (green) maybe valuable in concluding the diagnosis where dilemma exists so as to render appropriate treatment and have better patient compliance.
Declaration of patient consent
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Pynn BR, Sands TD, Bradley G. Benign cementoblastoma: A case report. J Can Dent Assoc 2001;67:260-2.
Subramani V, Narasimhan M, Ramalingam S, Anandan S, Ranganathan S. Revisiting cementoblastoma with a rare case presentation. Case Rep Pathol 2017;2017:8248691.
Brannon RB, Fowler CB, Carpenter WM, Corio RL. Cementoblastoma: An innocuous neoplasm? A clinicopathologic study of 44 cases and review of the literature with special emphasis on recurrence. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2002;93:311-20.
Neville BW, Damm DD, Allen CM, Bouquot JE. Bone pathology. In: Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology. 2nd
ed., Ch. 14. Philadelphia, Pa, USA: W.B. Saunders; 2002. p. 570-1.
Chrcanovic BR, Gomez RS. Cementoblastoma: An updated analysis of 258 cases reported in the literature. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2017;45:1759-66.
Chaput A, Marc A. Un cas de cementome localize sur une molaire temporaire. SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd 1965;75:48-52.
Vilasco J, Mazère J, Douesnard JC, Loubière R. A case of cementoblastoma. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac 1969;70:329-32.
Zachariades N, Skordalaki A, Papanicolaou S, Androulakakis E, Bournias M. Cementoblastoma: Review of the literature and report of a case in a 7 year-old girl. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1985;23:456-61.
Herzog S. Benign cementoblastoma associated with the primary dentition. J Oral Med 1987;42:106-8.
Cannell H. Cementoblastoma of deciduous tooth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991;71:648.
Schafer TE, Singh B, Myers DR. Cementoblastoma associated with a primary tooth: A rare pediatric lesion. Pediatr Dent 2001;23:351-3.
Ohki K, Kumamoto H, Nitta Y, Nagasaka H, Kawamura H, Ooya K. Benign cementoblastoma involving multiple maxillary teeth: Report of a case with a review of the literature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2004;97:53-8.
Lemberg K, Hagström J, Rihtniemi J, Soikkonen K. Benign cementoblastoma in a primary lower molar, a rarity. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007;36:364-6.
Vieira AP, Meneses JM Jr., Maia RL. Cementoblastoma related to a primary tooth: A case report. J Oral Pathol Med 2007;36:117-9.
de Noronha Santos Netto J, Marques AA, da Costa DO, de Queiroz Chaves Lourenço S. A rare case of cementoblastoma associated with the primary dentition. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;16:399-402.
Solomon MC, Rehani SH, Valiathan M, Rao L, Raghu AR, Rao NN, et al
. Benign cementoblastoma involving multiple deciduous and permanent teeth of maxilla-a case report. Oral Maxillofac Pathol J 2012;3:258-63.
Monti LM, Souza AM, Soubhia AM, Jorge WA, Anichinno M, Da Fonseca GL. Cementoblastoma: A case report in deciduous tooth. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;17:145-9.
Urs AB, Singh H, Rawat G, Mohanty S, Ghosh S. Cementoblastoma solely involving maxillary primary teeth – A rare presentation. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;40:147-51.
Nuvvula S, Manepalli S, Mohapatra A, Mallineni SK. Cementoblastoma relating to right mandibular second primary molar. Case Rep Dent 2016;2016:2319890.
Javed A, Hussain Shah SM. Giant cementoblastoma of left maxilla involving A deciduous molar. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2017;29:145-6.
Nagvekar S, Syed S, Spadigam A, Dhupar A. Rare presentation of cementoblastoma associated with the deciduous maxillary second molar. BMJ Case Rep 2017;2017. pii: bcr-2017-221977.
Mohammadi F, Aminishakib P, Niknami M, Razi Avarzamani A, Derakhshan S. Benign cementoblastoma involving deciduous and permanent mandibular molars: A case report. Iran J Med Sci 2018;43:664-7.
Tamme T, Soots M, Kulla A, Karu K, Hanstein SM, Sokk A, et al.
Odontogenic tumours, a collaborative retrospective study of 75 cases covering more than 25 years from Estonia. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2004;32:161-5.
Papageorge MB, Cataldo E, Nghiem FT. Cementoblastoma involving multiple deciduous teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1987;63:602-5.
Kumar S, Prabhakar V, Angra R. Infected cementoblastoma. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2011;2:200-3.
] [Full text]
Sumer M, Gunduz K, Sumer AP, Gunhan O. Benign cementoblastoma: A case report. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2006;11:E483-5.
Sapp JP, Eversole LR, Wysocki GP. Odontogenic tumors. In: Contemporary Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology. Ch. 5. St Louis: Mosby; 2004. p. 153-4.
Kalburge JV, Kulkarni MV, Kini Y. Cementoblastoma affecting the mandibular first molar-a case report. Pravara Med Rev 2010;5:33-7.
Marx R, Stern D. Odontogenic Tumours, In: Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology: A Rationale for Diagnosis and Treatment. 2nd
ed Ch. 15. Vol II. Illinois: Quintessence Publishing House; 2012. p. 704-6.
Monks FT, Bradley JC, Turner EP. Central osteoblastoma or cementoblastoma? A case report and 12 year review. Br J Oral Surg 1981;19:29-37.
Curé JK, Vattoth S, Shah R. Radiopaque jaw lesions: An approach to the differential diagnosis. Radiographics 2012;32:1909-25.
Napier Souza L, Monteiro Lima Júnior S, Garcia Santos Pimenta FJ, Rodrigues Antunes Souza AC, Santiago Gomez R. Atypical hypercementosis versus cementoblastoma. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004;33:267-70.
Cundiff EJ 2nd
. Developing cementoblastoma: Case report and update of differential diagnosis. Quintessence Int 2000;31:191-5.
Sharma N. Benign cementoblastoma: A rare case report with review of literature. Contemp Clin Dent 2014;5:92-4.
] [Full text]
Mudhiraj PV, Vanje MM, Reddy BN, Ahmed SA, Suri C, Taveer S, et al.
Nature of hard tissues in oral pathological lesions – Using modified Gallego's stain. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11:ZC13-5.
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9]
[Table 1], [Table 2]