Basal cell carcinoma of the eyelid in children: a report of three cases

Basal cell carcinoma is the most common eyelid malignancy, accounting for approximately 90% of malignant eyelid tumours. Despite its prevalence in adults, it is extremely rare in children, and usually occurs in the setting of a known genetic defect or following radiotherapy treatment. We report three cases of de novo basal cell carcinoma in children. These children had no known genetic syndromes and had not undergone radiotherapy.McGill Univ, Montreal Gen Hosp, Dept Ophthalmol, Henry S Witelson Ocular Pathol Lab, Montreal, PQ H3G 1A4, CanadaRoyal Victoria Hosp, Montreal, PQ H3A 1A1, CanadaUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Ophthalmol, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Ophthalmol, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of Scienc

Frequência do carcinoma basocelular na população menor de 50 anos: estudo do serviço e revisão de literatura Frequency of basal cell carcinoma in a population younger than 50 years of age: clinical study and literature review

O carcinoma basocelular é a neoplasia maligna cutânea mais comum em humanos, que pode ser prevenida e diagnosticada precocemente. O propósito deste estudo é apresentar os achados clínicos e microscópicos do carcinoma basocelular na população menor de 50 anos. Realizaram-se exames microscópicos em múltiplos cortes de lesão de pele e fez-se revisão da literatura pertinente.<br>Basal cell carcinoma is the most common type of malignant cutaneous neoplasm in humans, and it can be prevented and diagnosed early. The purpose of this study is to present clinical and microscopic findings of basal cell carcinoma in a population younger than 50 years of age. Microscopic examinations of multiple sections of skin lesion have been done, as well as a review of relevant literature

Unmet diagnostic needs in contact oral mucosal allergies

The oral mucosa including the lips is constantly exposed to several noxious stimuli, irritants and allergens. However, oral contact pathologies are not frequently seen because of the relative resistance of the oral mucosa to irritant agents and allergens due to anatomical and physiological factors. The spectrum of signs and symptoms of oral contact allergies (OCA) is broad and a large number of condition can be the clinical expression of OCA such as allergic contact stomatitis, allergic contact cheilitis, geographic tongue, oral lichenoid reactions, burning mouth syndrome. The main etiological factors causing OCA are dental materials, food and oral hygiene products, as they contain flavouring agents and preservatives. The personal medical history of the patient is helpful to perform a diagnosis, as a positive history for recent dental procedures. Sometimes histology is mandatory. When it cannot identify a direct cause of a substance, in both acute and chronic OCA, patch tests can play a pivotal role in the diagnosis. However, patch tests might have several pitfalls. Indeed, the presence of metal ions as haptens and specifically the differences in their concentrations in oral mucosa and in standard preparation for patch testing and in the differences in pH of the medium might result in either false positive/negative reactions or non-specific irritative reactions. Another limitation of patch test results is the difficulty to assess the clinical relevance of haptens contained in dental materials and only the removal of dental materials or the avoidance of other contactant and consequent improvement of the disease may demonstrate the haptens' responsibility. In conclusion, the wide spectrum of clinical presentations, the broad range of materials and allergens which can cause it, the difficult interpretation of patch-test results, the clinical relevance assessment of haptens found positive at patch test are the main factors that make sometimes difficult the diagnosis and the management of OCA that requires an interdisciplinary approach to the patient

Contact Allergy to Dental Materials and Implants

Dental professionals and dental patients are exposed to the same sensitizers, but the outcome is very different. Dental professionals suffer predominantly from irritant contact dermatitis and to a lesser degree from allergic contact dermatitis to acrylates and rubber products. Dental patients rarely have allergic contact stomatitis. In this chapter, the reader will learn about the multiple factors that lead to irritant contact dermatitis and also about the major sensitizers, e.g., methacrylates in dentin bonding agents, dental composite resins (DCR), and prostheses, in addition to rubber chemicals, metals, fragrances, and disinfectants. The various sensitizers that may give lichenoid reactions in patients are also discussed