Tongue Mucoceles: a retrospective clinic-pathological evaluation of 240 cases.
Mucocele
Retrospective study
Tongue
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Nov 2023
14 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
01
05
2023
accepted:
03
10
2023
medline:
15
11
2023
pubmed:
15
11
2023
entrez:
14
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Minor salivary glands can be found in the ventral and anterior part of the tongue; these glands can rarely develop mucoceles that, due to their rarity and their unusual clinical appearance, may present an interesting differential diagnosis. Mucoceles appear as an exophytic, sometimes pedunculated, lesion, which is a feature that is due to the absence of a capsule; thus, the glands are right beneath the mucosa and over the muscle tissue. The aim of this article is to retrospectively present and discuss the anatomy, pathology, clinical features and therapy of several cases of Blandin-Nunh mucoceles collected from two different institutions. A retrospective case review was carried out in two university institutions, retrieving all cases of tongue mucoceles from 1999 to today. Two oral pathologists reviewed all the slides, confirming the diagnosis. Demographic data of the patient, anatomic location and clinical appearance were retrieved from clinical charts, together with the type of surgical procedure and possible relapses. A total of 240 cases of tongue mucoceles were gathered from the archives: the mean age was 22 years (DS = 14,7; Range 2-83), 126 were females (52,5%, mean age 22,7 years, DS = 16,5; Range 2-83), and 114 were males (47,5%, mean age 20,9 years, DS = 12,4; Range 3-73); in all cases, a history of trauma was reported. The ventral surface was the most frequent location (224 cases - 93,3%), and in the great majority (235 cases - 97,9%), pathology revealed mucous spillage with a wall formed by fibrous connective and granulation tissue with no epithelium lining the cavity. Superficial mucocele and sclerosing sialoadenitis were the more frequent pathological variants (21 cases - 8,8%). All lesions were treated with excision and enucleation of the servicing gland. The healing was uneventful in all cases, but there were four recurrences and two cases of sensory paraesthesia of the border of the tongue, all in males, except one case of paraesthesia in a female. Tongue mucoceles must be differentiated from many benign and malignant lesions. For this reason, surgical removal of the lesion and of the associated gland with a pathological exam is mandatory. In fact, the anatomical location of the glands and the possible pathological variants must be considered to reach a correct diagnosis and diminish possible relapses. CE-Muc_Ton_3/2023.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Minor salivary glands can be found in the ventral and anterior part of the tongue; these glands can rarely develop mucoceles that, due to their rarity and their unusual clinical appearance, may present an interesting differential diagnosis. Mucoceles appear as an exophytic, sometimes pedunculated, lesion, which is a feature that is due to the absence of a capsule; thus, the glands are right beneath the mucosa and over the muscle tissue. The aim of this article is to retrospectively present and discuss the anatomy, pathology, clinical features and therapy of several cases of Blandin-Nunh mucoceles collected from two different institutions.
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective case review was carried out in two university institutions, retrieving all cases of tongue mucoceles from 1999 to today. Two oral pathologists reviewed all the slides, confirming the diagnosis. Demographic data of the patient, anatomic location and clinical appearance were retrieved from clinical charts, together with the type of surgical procedure and possible relapses.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 240 cases of tongue mucoceles were gathered from the archives: the mean age was 22 years (DS = 14,7; Range 2-83), 126 were females (52,5%, mean age 22,7 years, DS = 16,5; Range 2-83), and 114 were males (47,5%, mean age 20,9 years, DS = 12,4; Range 3-73); in all cases, a history of trauma was reported. The ventral surface was the most frequent location (224 cases - 93,3%), and in the great majority (235 cases - 97,9%), pathology revealed mucous spillage with a wall formed by fibrous connective and granulation tissue with no epithelium lining the cavity. Superficial mucocele and sclerosing sialoadenitis were the more frequent pathological variants (21 cases - 8,8%). All lesions were treated with excision and enucleation of the servicing gland. The healing was uneventful in all cases, but there were four recurrences and two cases of sensory paraesthesia of the border of the tongue, all in males, except one case of paraesthesia in a female.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Tongue mucoceles must be differentiated from many benign and malignant lesions. For this reason, surgical removal of the lesion and of the associated gland with a pathological exam is mandatory. In fact, the anatomical location of the glands and the possible pathological variants must be considered to reach a correct diagnosis and diminish possible relapses.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
CE-Muc_Ton_3/2023.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37964264
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03485-y
pii: 10.1186/s12903-023-03485-y
pmc: PMC10647170
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
862Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Indian J Dent Res. 2013 Mar-Apr;24(2):211-5
pubmed: 23965448
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Apr;69(4):1086-93
pubmed: 20708324
J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2014 Sep;18(Suppl 1):S72-7
pubmed: 25364184
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009 Sep 01;14(9):e469-74
pubmed: 19415059
Pediatr Dermatol. 2008 May-Jun;25(3):308-11
pubmed: 18577033
Diagn Cytopathol. 2000 May;22(5):308-12
pubmed: 10790239
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Jun;67(6):1307-10
pubmed: 19446221
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003 Apr;95(4):467-70
pubmed: 12686932
J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2022 Jan-Mar;26(1):101-103
pubmed: 35571290
Ann Diagn Pathol. 2016 Apr;21:44-6
pubmed: 27040930
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2014 Jul;78(7):1179-81
pubmed: 24814234
Gen Dent. 2009 Jan-Feb;57(1):82-8
pubmed: 19146147
N Am J Med Sci. 2012 Sep;4(9):379-83
pubmed: 23050245
J Craniofac Surg. 2012 Nov;23(6):e657-8
pubmed: 23172517
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010 Oct;68(10):2468-71
pubmed: 20594633
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2013 Sep;6(3):201-4
pubmed: 25206223
Clin Oral Investig. 2009 Sep;13(3):351-3
pubmed: 19172313
Quintessence Int. 2011 Sep;42(8):679-85
pubmed: 21842008
Lasers Med Sci. 2012 Nov;27(6):1251-5
pubmed: 22843311
Indian J Surg. 2009 Jun;71(3):154-5
pubmed: 23133140
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2001 Nov 1;61(2):143-7
pubmed: 11589981
Int J Paediatr Dent. 2012 Sep;22(5):318-23
pubmed: 22092694
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2021 Jun;54(3):543-551
pubmed: 34024482
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Mar;15(1):11-3
pubmed: 20393765
Pediatr Dent. 2009 May-Jun;31(3):249-52
pubmed: 19552230
J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2022 Apr-Jun;26(2):283
pubmed: 35968188