Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology · 2025
Adverse Reactions to Cosmetic Fillers in the Oral and Maxillofacial Region: Clinico-Pathological, Histochemical, and Immunohistochemical Characterization.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tetzner Ana Cristina, Viana Laura Regina Mendes, Abreu Lucas Guimarães, Mendonça Elismauro Francisco, Arantes Diego Antônio Costa, Vasconcelos Ana Carolina Uchoa, Gomes Ana Paula Neutzling, Nonaka Cassiano Francisco Weege, Alves Pollianna Muniz, Tapia Roberto Onner Cruz, Mesquita Ricardo Alves, de Sousa Sílvia Ferreira, Silva Tarcília Aparecida, Caldeira Patrícia Carlos
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cosmetic injections are increasing, as their complications, which can be misdiagnosed as neoplastic lesions. This study aimed to detail clinical, pathological, histochemical, and immunohistochemical features of adverse reactions to cosmetic fillers in the oral and maxillofacial region.
METHODS: Samples were retrieved from five pathology laboratories. Hematoxylin-eosin (H&E), Alcian Blue, Sirius Red, and Toluidine blue stains were performed, as well as immunohistochemistry for CD68, CD3, and CD20. H&E was evaluated under polarization. Descriptive statistics were performed.
RESULTS: Twenty-three cases were included. Polymethyl-methacrylate was the most common material. Most reactions affected women, lips and were asymptomatic, with a variable time of evolution, presenting as nodules. Materials had different shape and size on H&E. Giant cells were commonly found, except in silicone and hyaluronic acid. Foreign-body granuloma was frequent in polymethyl-methacrylate. Calcium hydroxyapatite and poly-L-lactic acid were refractile under polarized light. Hyaluronic acid and polyacrylamide hydrogel were metachromatic by Toluidine blue. Alcian blue was positive in all cases of hyaluronic acid. Mast cells were detected in all materials, except hyaluronic acid and polyacrylamide hydrogel. Eosinophils were rarer than mast cells. Numerous CD68-positive cells were seen in all cases. All cases had CD3-positive cells, with variable amounts. CD20 was scant or negative in most cases.
CONCLUSIONS: An evident macrophage reaction is observed in all aesthetic fillers, frequently associated with giant cell formation. Despite similarities, there are specific features of each material and the host response that assist the correct histopathological diagnosis. Immunohistochemistry for CD68 and Toluidine blue stain are useful in doubtful cases.
METHODS: Samples were retrieved from five pathology laboratories. Hematoxylin-eosin (H&E), Alcian Blue, Sirius Red, and Toluidine blue stains were performed, as well as immunohistochemistry for CD68, CD3, and CD20. H&E was evaluated under polarization. Descriptive statistics were performed.
RESULTS: Twenty-three cases were included. Polymethyl-methacrylate was the most common material. Most reactions affected women, lips and were asymptomatic, with a variable time of evolution, presenting as nodules. Materials had different shape and size on H&E. Giant cells were commonly found, except in silicone and hyaluronic acid. Foreign-body granuloma was frequent in polymethyl-methacrylate. Calcium hydroxyapatite and poly-L-lactic acid were refractile under polarized light. Hyaluronic acid and polyacrylamide hydrogel were metachromatic by Toluidine blue. Alcian blue was positive in all cases of hyaluronic acid. Mast cells were detected in all materials, except hyaluronic acid and polyacrylamide hydrogel. Eosinophils were rarer than mast cells. Numerous CD68-positive cells were seen in all cases. All cases had CD3-positive cells, with variable amounts. CD20 was scant or negative in most cases.
CONCLUSIONS: An evident macrophage reaction is observed in all aesthetic fillers, frequently associated with giant cell formation. Despite similarities, there are specific features of each material and the host response that assist the correct histopathological diagnosis. Immunohistochemistry for CD68 and Toluidine blue stain are useful in doubtful cases.