2015
DOI: 10.21767/2386-5180.100040
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Case of Mandibular Tumour in a Skull from an Early Modern Cemetery in Wroclaw, Poland

Abstract: Background: The objective of our study was to diagnose a case of non-malignant bone tissue malformation in an adult female, located in the midline of the mandibular body, as a part of skeletal material excavated from the Early Modern cemetery in Wrocław. Methods and Findings:The macroscopically identified tumour-like hyperplastic lesion was examined using radiographic imaging techniques but also analysed for histopathological features. We identified signs of periosteal reaction and irregular growth of bone tis… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 21 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although the rational of Kaplan et al, (1994) can also be applied to cranial osteomata, Eshed et al (2002) suggested that, based on their histological features, these lesions be reclassified as hamartoma, a malformation that resembles a neoplasm but results from faulty development. In palaeopathological case reports of osteomata, these lesions are referred to as tumours, and the debate regarding their status as a neoplasm is either not mentioned or not discussed (Blau, 2006; Castro et al, 2019; Dąbrowski et al, 2015; Galassi et al, 2020; Giuffra et al, 2019; Licata, Borgo, Armocida, Nicosia, & Ferioli, 2016; Piombino‐Mascali, Zink, & Panzer, 2017; Premužić & Šikanjic, 2013; Odes et al, 2018; Smith, 2010; Zias, 2006). Bartelink and Wright (2011) seem to be the only researchers who did note this debate in their report of a mandibular tumour from Guatemala, dated to the 6 th to 9 th century CE.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the rational of Kaplan et al, (1994) can also be applied to cranial osteomata, Eshed et al (2002) suggested that, based on their histological features, these lesions be reclassified as hamartoma, a malformation that resembles a neoplasm but results from faulty development. In palaeopathological case reports of osteomata, these lesions are referred to as tumours, and the debate regarding their status as a neoplasm is either not mentioned or not discussed (Blau, 2006; Castro et al, 2019; Dąbrowski et al, 2015; Galassi et al, 2020; Giuffra et al, 2019; Licata, Borgo, Armocida, Nicosia, & Ferioli, 2016; Piombino‐Mascali, Zink, & Panzer, 2017; Premužić & Šikanjic, 2013; Odes et al, 2018; Smith, 2010; Zias, 2006). Bartelink and Wright (2011) seem to be the only researchers who did note this debate in their report of a mandibular tumour from Guatemala, dated to the 6 th to 9 th century CE.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%