The occurrence of Central Giant Cell Granuloma (CGCG) represents a rare yet clinically significant entity within the realm of maxillofacial pathology. This article presents a compelling case of CGCG in a 17-year-old female, shedding light on the diagnostic and therapeutic challenges encountered in managing this condition. Given the relative infrequency of CGCG in this demographic, the case not only contributes to the clinical understanding of CGCG but also underscores the importance of tailored, patient-specific management strategies. Through this presentation, we aim to elucidate the intricacies of CGCG manifestation, diagnosis, and treatment while highlighting the nuanced considerations essential in addressing this pathology in adolescent patients.

Background Central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) presents as a locally invasive, intraosseous lesion characterized by the accumulation of multinucleated giant cells amidst a matrix of hemorrhage and reactive fibrous tissue that infiltrates bone trabeculae. This idiopathic non-neoplastic proliferative lesion primarily affects the mandible, typically presenting as either unilocular or multilocular radiolucencies on X-rays. Although trauma or intraosseous hemorrhages are potential triggers, the precise histogenesis and etiology remain unclear. CGCG predominantly occurs in children and young adults, with a slight female predilection. Methods and materials A retrospective analysis of 21 cases of CGCG diagnosed at the Oral Pathology/Pathology department of Temple University Hospital between 2015 and 2022 was conducted. Each case was evaluated based on various parameters, including age, gender, presenting symptoms, radiographic findings, clinical differential diagnosis, and histological confirmation. The primary radiographic technique employed for diagnosis was X-ray imaging of the mandible and maxilla. The histological examination involved cutting paraffin-embedded tissue into 5-micrometer-thick sections, which were then stained using routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stain. Notably, no specialized histochemical or immunohistochemical stains were utilized in the evaluation process. Results In our study, we reviewed 21 cases; 9 were male, 11 were female, and one had no available gender data. The age range was 15-76 years, with a mean of 50 years. The mandible was the most commonly affected location (17 cases; 81%) while the maxilla was less commonly involved (4 cases; 19%). Many CGCG lesions were asymptomatic (13 cases; 62%); eight cases (38%) were symptomatic, with pain and fullness of the affected dental region being the main manifestations. In a few cases, conditions such as brown tumor (severe hyperparathyroidism) and odontogenic neoplasms, such as ameloblastoma, were suspected clinically and radiographically. The diagnosis of CGCG with associated acute and chronic inflammation was confirmed in all the cases. Histological evaluation of routinely stained slides was the main diagnostic tool utilized. No special stains or molecular studies were required to establish the final diagnosis. Conclusions Our investigation has determined that CGCG exhibits a non-neoplastic nature, displaying a spectrum of behaviors ranging from non-aggressive to aggressive tendencies. While CGCG is predominantly observed in the mandible, rare instances of involvement in the maxilla have also been documented. Importantly, no confirmed association with neoplastic lesions was identified during our analysis. The clinical course of CGCG tends to be indolent, with some cases presenting in association with impacted teeth. It\'s noteworthy that CGCG can present features mimicking neoplastic conditions, such as ameloblastoma, or localized lesions linked to systemic disorders such as hyperparathyroidism (brown tumor).

Central and peripheral giant cell granulomas are benign entities mostly seen in mandibular anterior region at female individuals, usually with observed recurrence. Their etiology is still unclear, as is the optimal method for treating them. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, treatment methods, recurrence rates, and initial and definitive correlation of central and peripheral giant cell granulomas. Patients who were referred to our clinic between 2013 and 2023 and who had the lesions\' definitive diagnosis as \"central giant cell granuloma\" (CGCG) or \"peripheral giant cell granuloma\" (PGCG) were included in the study. Demographic data, recurrence rates, treatment methods, lesion location, clinical behaviors, and sizes were noted on the reports. A total of 30 lesions in 23 patients (14 PGCG and 9 CGCG) were evaluated in this study. The mean follow-up time was 62.6 months; 8 of 23 patients had systemic disease. While only 1 patient was observed to have cortical bone destruction in PCGC, all patients were found to have cortical bone destruction in CGCG (p < 0.05). In both lesions, the correlation of preliminary and definitive diagnosis was evaluated, and it was found to be 50% in PGCG while it was 77.7% in CGCG. The recurrence rates were 21.4% in PGCG and 33.3% in CGCG. Curettage was applied in all patients. Additional treatments (intralesional steroid injections, denasumab applications, resection, and graft application) were performed in 5 patients who were found to have CGCG (p = 0.004). However, there was no significant relation between treatment method and recurrence in CGCG (p > 0.05). Various peripheral lesions could mimic PGCG; thus, curettage therapy could be appropriate in the treatment of PGCG. Nevertheless, in some cases of CGCG, additional treatment methods could be more effective for preventing recurrence and any other complications.

UNASSIGNED: Central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) is a fairly common lesion involving the jaw bones. CGCG can show relatively innocuous biological behaviour or it may show clinicoradiological features suggestive of aggressive biological behaviour. To date, there are no histological parameters which can be used to predict the behaviour of these lesions. This study was conducted to assess the utility of parameters of angiogenesis, i.e., total vascular area (TVA), mean vascular area (MVA) and microvessel density (MVD), and density of myofibroblasts in aggressive and non-aggressive CGCGs.
UNASSIGNED: The study was undertaken as a retrospective study. A total of 20 previously diagnosed cases (10 non-aggressive and 10 aggressive) of CGCGs were included in the study. The sections were subjected to immunohistochemistry using the markers CD34 and α-SMA. For the assessment of vascular parameters, image J software was used. The density of myofibroblasts was determined in each case ranging from score-1 to 4, using the criteria given by Sridhara et al. The correlation between mean values of vascular parameters and density of myofibroblasts with aggressiveness of CGCG was assessed using Mann-Whitney U test.
UNASSIGNED: The result of Mann-Whitney U test suggested that the differences between the values of TVA (P < 0.001), MVA (P < 0.003) and density of myofibroblasts, i.e., SMA mean (P < 0.001) and SMA score (P < 0.001), in two groups are statistically significant. The formula for the assessment of aggressiveness was obtained using discriminant analysis.
UNASSIGNED: Angiogenesis and density of myofibroblasts significantly differ in aggressive and non-aggressive cases of CGCGs. The aggressiveness of CGCG case can be predicted using the obtained formula by entering the values of vascular parameters and myofibroblasts.

Central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) is a rare lesion of the jaw occurring in young adults and adolescents. Surgery, the traditional mainstay of therapy, is associated with significant morbidity. Denosumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody to RANKL, is effective in a related entity, giant cell tumour of bone (GCTB), but experience in the more indolent CGCG is limited. This prospective observational study of all denosumab-treated CGCG at a tertiary referral centre (2015-2021) aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy and recurrence risk using denosumab in CGCG at lower-frequency dosing than used for GCTB. All received standardised, time-limited courses of denosumab 120 mg with stepwise increase in dosing interval based on response. They were followed for up to 75 months using a radiation-minimising protocol: 3-monthly clinical, biochemical and radiological assessment (orthopantomograms, cone beam CT). Eight patients, median age 20.5 years [IQR 6], received 13 initial doses [IQR 10] of denosumab 120 mg. Radiologic response was seen after 5.5 doses [IQR 4.5]: ossification in all and size reduction in three. Recurrence occurred in four of seven completing therapy, observed 12 months post-cessation [IQR 6.5]. Larger baseline size, aggressive subtype and fewer than 12 initial doses were more common in the recurrence group. There was no osteonecrosis of the jaw. Hypocalcaemia occurred in one receiving modified dosing. This study represents the largest, most diverse cohort of denosumab-treated CGCG with the longest follow-up in literature. It demonstrates the efficacy of lower-frequency, time-restricted course of denosumab but highlights the risk of recurrence. Long-term follow-up is critical.

OBJECTIVE: Noonan syndrome is a rare genetic disorder characterized mainly by congenital heart disease, occasional intellectual disability, and varied orthopaedic, rheumatological and haematologic anomalies. Despite potentially serious functional consequences, joint involvement has been rarely studied in the literature. Our objective was to perform a retrospective study evaluating the prevalence and characteristics of joint involvement in Noonan syndrome.
METHODS: We recorded articular symptoms, including their type and frequency, in patients with Noonan syndrome followed up in French hospitals. Patients were included if the diagnosis was confirmed before the age of 20 based on the van der Burgt criteria or genetic analysis. Data are presented as frequencies or medians (ranges), and patient groups were compared using chi-square or Fisher tests.
RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were included from 4 centres. The average age was 12.5 years (range: 2-36). Musculoskeletal pain was found in 18 patients (25%) and joint stiffness in 10 (14%) located in the wrists, elbows, ankles, knees and hips, which was usually bilateral. Only one destructive form was described (multiple villonodular synovitis and a giant cell lesion of the jaw). There were no cases of systemic lupus erythaematosus (SLE) or other autoimmune arthritis. Raynaud\'s phenomenon was observed in 3 patients. Only 50% of joint complaints led to additional exploration. SOS1 mutations (P<0.05) and treatment with growth hormone (GH) (P<0.05) were the only factors significantly related to musculoskeletal pain. Patients treated with GH did not have more SOS1 mutations. Patients experiencing pain were not more likely to experience stiffness, joint hypermobility, or coagulation abnormalities.
CONCLUSIONS: Joint manifestations were frequent in Noonan syndrome, predominant in large joints, and rarely explored. Multiple villonodular synovitis is characteristic but rare. Auto-immune disorders were not described in this cohort. A more multidisciplinary approach could be recommended for the early detection of possibly disabling rheumatologic manifestations.

UNASSIGNED: To review and analyze the clinical and imaging features of central giant cell granuloma patients and to review the relevant literatures for the diagnosis and clinical manifestation of central giant cell granuloma.
UNASSIGNED: Seven cases of central giant cell granuloma were retrospectively selected for the study, all of which were confirmed by pathology and had relevant imaging investigations. All seven cases had undergone CT scan, three cases had undergone MRI scan. Detailed clinical features were compared along with the imaging findings and analysis was done on the basis of their presentation and imaging features.
UNASSIGNED: The clinical features, radiologic features were varied according to the site of the lesion. CT features include unevenly dense expansile mass causing bone destruction and cortical thinning. While MRI features with low to iso-intensity in T1- and T2 weighted images. There may be presence of cystic degeneration, hemorrhage or hemosiderin deposits or osteoid formation, which can cause T1 and T2 signal changes. On contrast study, the lesion doesn\'t enhance but periphery may enhance mildly.
UNASSIGNED: Unevenly dense expansile mass with bone destruction and cortical thinning with low to iso-intensity in T1 weighted and T2 weighted images and mildly enhance peripherally, Central giant cell granuloma should be considered.

BACKGROUND: The central giant cell granuloma(CGCG) of bone constitutes about 10% of benign jawbone lesions. It affects females more often than males, mandible than maxilla. Biological behavior of CGCG ranges from a slow growing asymptomatic swelling to an aggressive process. True giant cell tumor (GCT) should be distinguished from CGCG. The histological distinction between these lesions depends on quite subtle differences. Expression of p63 has been demonstrated in GCT of bone conversely, has not been detected in CGCG. Therefore this short study attempts to study the expression of p63 in CGCG in conjunction with clinicopathological profile of the cases reported in the institute.
OBJECTIVE: To review all the cases of CGCGs of the jaws reported in the institute from 1998 to 2015 and study their clinicopathological profile.To study the immunohistochemical (IHC) expression of p63 in CGCG cases.
METHODS: The retrospective study reviewed records for clinically and histopathologically diagnosed cases of CGCG from the archives of department of Oral pathology. Data was recorded and analyzed. These cases were subjected for IHC analysis for expression of p63, also RANK, RANKL in selected cases to study the nature of giant cells.
CONCLUSIONS: This paper is an institutional experience of clinicopathological profile of diagnosed cases of CGCG. Clinicopathological findings were in concurrent with previous literature. Total number of cases was ten. Six occurred in females and four in males. Most of them occurred in the second decade, more commonly involving mandible. Three cases showed recurrence. Histologically most showed classical features. Expression of p63 showed negativity in all the cases in accordance with the previous studies. RANK and RANKL showed strong and diffuse immunoexpression in both mononuclear and giant cells. Thus study supports the finding that p63 expression can be used to differentiate between CGCG and GCT. However, more number of studies with larger sample size are required to confirm reliability of using p63 as a distinguishing marker between GCT and CGCG.

OBJECTIVE: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with a central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) treated at a single center to assess and compare the different surgical and non-surgical approaches.
METHODS: A cohort with a single histologically proven non-syndrome-related CGCG was selected and reviewed. Patients were allocated to group I (surgery), group II (pharmacotherapy), and group III (pharmacotherapy and surgery). The primary outcome was long-term radiologic response using computed tomography. Secondary outcomes were intermediate radiologic responses and occurrence and severity of side effects.
RESULTS: Thirty-three subjects were included in the study. The surgical group (n = 4) included 1 patient with progression during follow-up and a relatively high post-surgical morbidity. Twenty-nine patients started on various pharmacological treatment regimens (groups II and III). Fourteen patients could be managed without additional surgery. One of these lesions showed progression during follow-up. The other 15 lesions underwent additional surgery, and none showed progression during follow-up. Interferon treatment was associated with the most side effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacological agents have a role in the treatment of aggressive and non-aggressive CGCGs by limiting the renewed progression during long-term follow up and the extent and morbidity of surgical treatment.

Recurrence is a major problem following the treatment of aggressive central giant cell granuloma (CGCG). The aim of this study was to compare the frequency of recurrence between patients who received calcitonin nasal spray after curettage of CGCGs and those who did not. A double-blind clinical trial was designed. Patients were allocated to one of two groups: those in the calcitonin group underwent curettage and received calcitonin salmon nasal spray 200IU/day once a day for 3 months after surgery; those in the control group underwent curettage of CGCGs and received a placebo once a day for 3 months after surgery. All patients were followed for 5 years after surgery. Twenty-four patients were treated in the two groups. There was no difference in age, sex, tumour size, or tumour location between the two groups (P>0.05). Eight of the 24 patients (33.3%) had recurrences during the follow-up period: one in the calcitonin group (9.1%) and seven in the control group (53.8%). Analysis of the data demonstrated a significant difference between the two study groups (P=0.033). It appears that calcitonin nasal spray may reduce the frequency of recurrence in aggressive CGCGs in the mandible and maxilla.