• Ghousia Fatima, Nagarajappa Sandesh, S Ravindra, and Sudhindra Kulkarni.
• Department of Periodontics, Saraswati Dhanwantari Dental College, Parbhani, Maharastra, India.
• Gen Dent. 2009 Sep 1; 57 (5): 472-7; quiz 478-9, 535-6.

AbstractThis study considered 120 cases of localized gingival overgrowths that had been clinically diagnosed, surgically excised, and submitted for histopathological examination from 2000 to 2006. Data regarding the patient's age and gender and the lesion's anatomical location, clinical diagnosis, and recurrence were retrieved from case records. The percentage of concurrence and discrepancy between clinical and histopathological diagnosis was calculated using a discrepancy index. In 46.60% of cases, the diagnoses were in total agreement; discrepancies were noted in 53.40% of cases. The diagnosis of peripheral giant cell granuloma showed a high discrepancy (88.89%). Recurrence was seen in five cases. The high discrepancy between the clinical and histopathological diagnosis of localized gingival overgrowths indicates the need for a confirmatory histological examination for diagnosis and complete management of the lesion.

39 keywords...

hide…