Outcomes of the use of irrigating drains in severe odontogenic infection management.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of 2 types of drains for severe odontogenic infection management. STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-eight patients with severe odontogenic infections underwent drainage performed under general anesthesia. According to the type of drain used, they were randomized and separated into 2 groups: irrigating (n = 19) and non-irrigating drain (n = 19). Data such as age, ethnicity, sex, number of teeth, and fascial spaces were collected on admission through anamnesis. The clinical and laboratory parameters were checked every 24 hours until discharge. Symptom evolution was monitored daily using a visual analog scale. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for the primary outcome, and a P value < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in the overall length of stay was observed. Statistically significant differences in parameters such as pain, odynophagia, and leukocyte and segmented neutrophil counts were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Non-irrigating drains may be as effective as irrigating drains in treating severe odontogenic infections.

Angiogenesis pattern and H3.3 histone mutation in aggressive and non-aggressive central giant cell lesions.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate angiogenesis in central giant cell lesions (CGCL) and its association with biological behavior. In addition, investigation of the histone H3.3 mutation was performed. DESIGN: Thirty-eight cases of CGCL were classified as aggressive (n = 9) or nonaggressive (n = 29). Cases were submitted to immunohistochemistry to compare angiogenesis using Wilms' tumor protein 1 (WT1), platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule (CD31) and endoglin (CD105) between groups. To verify the presence of genic mutation, histone H3.3 was investigated. RESULTS: WT1 was expressed in mononuclear and giant cells of all cases. CD31 and CD105 were expressed in CGCL microvessels, with a higher CD105 microvascular density than CD31. No statistically significant difference was observed between groups. None of the cases studied showed the histone mutation. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference between aggressive and nonaggressive lesions regarding the angiogenic markers. The expression of WT1 and CD105 suggests that CGCL presents a tumoral vascular pattern with high neoangiogenic activity. The absence of histone mutation may indicate that CGCL is not a true giant cell tumor.