Assessment of angiogenic markers in oral hemangiomas and pyogenic granulomas

Freitas, Tarsila M. C.; Miguel, Márcia Cristina da Costa; Silveira, Éricka Janine Dantas da; Freitas, Roseana A.; Galvão, Hébel Cavalcanti

doi:10.1016/j.yexmp.2005.02.006

Cited by 37 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Immunohistochemical expression of VEGF was evaluated both in the connective tissue of PGs, RCs, and RRCs and in the epithelial lining of RCs and RRCs. In the connective tissue, a quantitative assessment of the immunopositive cells, irrespective of the color intensity, was performed according to the method proposed by Freitas et al 20 Tissue sections were examined by light micros- copy using ϫ100 magnification to identify 5 fields with the largest number of immunostained cells. Using ϫ400 magnification, the counting of the immunopositive cells was performed in each one of these fields.…”

Section: Immunostaining Assessment and Statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adopting the methodology proposed by Freitas et al, 20 a microvessel count (MVC) was performed. Tissue sections were examined by light microscope at ϫ40 magnification, and 5 areas showing the highest vascularization were identified subjectively.…”

Section: Immunostaining Assessment and Statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…19 Although angiogenesis cannot be measured directly, it can be assessed by quantification of the vessels immunolabeled by specific antibodies against endothelial cell epitopes, such as von Willebrand factor (vWF). 20 In this manner, it is possible to indirectly establish the angiogenic activity of a tissue. 20,21 To our knowledge, there are no studies analyzing the expression of VEGF in PGs, RCs, and RRCs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…20 In this manner, it is possible to indirectly establish the angiogenic activity of a tissue. 20,21 To our knowledge, there are no studies analyzing the expression of VEGF in PGs, RCs, and RRCs. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess and compare the immunoexpression of VEGF in these lesions, relating it to the angiogenic index and the intensity of the inflammatory infiltrate.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Immunoexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor in periapical granulomas, radicular cysts, and residual radicular cysts

Nonaka¹,

Maia²,

Nascimento³

et al. 2008

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, an

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Immunostaining Assessment and Statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Immunostaining Assessment and Statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Immunoexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor in periapical granulomas, radicular cysts, and residual radicular cysts

Nonaka¹,

Maia²,

Nascimento³

et al. 2008

Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, an

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several biological markers with affinity for specific epitopes on endothelial cells, such as von Willebrand factor/factor VIII, CD31, CD44, CD105 (endoglin), and CD34, have been used to investigate the pathogenesis of head and neck tumors such as pyogenic granulomas and hemangiomas, which often exhibit similar clinical and histopathological characteristics that impair their diagnosis [1,3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expression of CD34 and CD105 as markers for angiogenesis in oral vascular malformations and pyogenic granulomas

Vasconcelos

Alves

Vasconcelos

et al. 2011

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to assess angiogenic activity by analyzing anti-CD105 and anti-CD34 immunostaining in 20 cases of vascular malformations (VMs) and 20 cases of oral pyogenic granulomas (OPG). In addition, the usefulness of these markers for the differential diagnosis of these two oral tumors was evaluated. The results showed no significant difference in mean microvessel count between the anti-CD105 (P = 0.803) and anti-CD34 (P = 0.279) antibody. The mean number of vessels was 18.75 and 59.72 for oral VMs immunostained with anti-CD105 and anti-CD34 antibody, respectively, whereas in OPG the mean number was 20.22 and 48.09, respectively. CD34 was found to be more effective than CD105 in identifying blood vessels. However, the anti-CD105 antibody seems to be more related to vascular neoformation. Overall, this study supports the role of angiogenic factors in the etiopathogenesis of oral VMs and PG, but the results showed that quantification of angiogenesis cannot be used as a marker for the differential diagnosis of these two types of lesions.

show abstract