Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016
Clinicopathologic Correlation of White, Non scrapable Oral Mucosal Surface Lesions: A Study of 100 Cases.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Abidullah Mohammed, Raghunath Vandana, Karpe Tanveer, Akifuddin Syed, Imran Shahid, Dhurjati Venkata Naga Nalini, Aleem Mohammed Ahtesham, Khatoon Farheen
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: White, non scrapable lesions are commonly seen in the oral cavity. Based on their history and clinical appearance, most of these lesions can be easily diagnosed, but sometimes diagnosis may go wrong. In order to arrive to a confirmative diagnosis, histopathological assessment is needed in many cases, if not all.
AIMS: 1) To find out the prevalence of clinically diagnosed oral white, non scrapable lesions. 2) To find out the prevalence of histopathologically diagnosed oral white, non scrapable lesions. 3) To correlate the clinical and histopathological diagnosis in the above lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 100 cases of oral white, non scrapable lesions were included in the study. Based on their history and clinical presentation, clinical provisional diagnosis was made. Then biopsy was done and confirmatory histopathological diagnosis was given and both were correlated. In order to correlate clinical and histopathological diagnosis Discrepancy Index (DI) was calculated for all the cases.
RESULTS: Based on clinical diagnosis, there were 59 cases (59%) of leukoplakia, 29 cases (29%) of lichen planus and six cases (6%) of lichenoid reaction; whereas, based on histopathological diagnosis, there were 66 cases (66%) of leukoplakia epithelial hyperplasia and hyperkeratosis (leukoplakia) and 30 cases (30%) of lichen planus. Seventy eight clinically diagnosed cases (78%) correlated with the histopathological diagnosis and 22 cases (22%) did not correlate. The total discrepancy index was 22%.
CONCLUSION: A clinician needs to be aware of oral white, non scrapable lesions. Due to the overlapping of many clinical features in some of these lesions and also due to their malignant potential, a histopathological confirmative diagnosis is recommended.
AIMS: 1) To find out the prevalence of clinically diagnosed oral white, non scrapable lesions. 2) To find out the prevalence of histopathologically diagnosed oral white, non scrapable lesions. 3) To correlate the clinical and histopathological diagnosis in the above lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 100 cases of oral white, non scrapable lesions were included in the study. Based on their history and clinical presentation, clinical provisional diagnosis was made. Then biopsy was done and confirmatory histopathological diagnosis was given and both were correlated. In order to correlate clinical and histopathological diagnosis Discrepancy Index (DI) was calculated for all the cases.
RESULTS: Based on clinical diagnosis, there were 59 cases (59%) of leukoplakia, 29 cases (29%) of lichen planus and six cases (6%) of lichenoid reaction; whereas, based on histopathological diagnosis, there were 66 cases (66%) of leukoplakia epithelial hyperplasia and hyperkeratosis (leukoplakia) and 30 cases (30%) of lichen planus. Seventy eight clinically diagnosed cases (78%) correlated with the histopathological diagnosis and 22 cases (22%) did not correlate. The total discrepancy index was 22%.
CONCLUSION: A clinician needs to be aware of oral white, non scrapable lesions. Due to the overlapping of many clinical features in some of these lesions and also due to their malignant potential, a histopathological confirmative diagnosis is recommended.