In this study, we evaluated the outcome of surgical intervention for recurrent GCT.\n\nTwenty-seven

patients (14 males and 13 females) with recurrent GCT were recruited. Their primary GCTs were all treated with intralesional surgery. Among these recurrent GCTs, selleck compound 9 grade III and 1 grade II tumors were treated with en bloc resection and endoprosthetic replacement, whereas 16 grade II and 1 grade III tumors were treated with intralesional curettage and PMMA bone cement filling.\n\nThe mean interval between initial surgery and first recurrence was 28.8 months (range 7-97 months). About 70 % of first recurrences affected bones around the knee, 44 % in the proximal tibia and 26 % in the distal femur. Of 27 patients, 3 women

treated with intralesional procedures suffered second recurrences in the proximal tibia. No second recurrence was found in patients with en bloc resection. Two grade III re-recurrence GCTs were treated with en bloc resection, and 1 grade II was treated with an intralesional procedure. One patient with en bloc resection developed tumor metastasis in both lungs. Compared to patients with intralesional treatment, the functional score was significantly decreased selleck kinase inhibitor in patients with en bloc resection (p < 0.01).\n\nThe re-recurrence risk of grade III GCTs can be significantly decreased by wide en bloc resection and endoprosthetic replacement. However, intralesional treatment is a good option for less aggressive (< grade II) recurrent GCTs because it can preserve ideal limb function and reduce surgical complications.”
“The

aim of this study was to evaluate the fracture resistance of teeth with incomplete root development and intracanal reinforcement with adhesives materials. 50 human central and lateral incisors were instrumented and prepared to simulate an immature tooth and filled apically with MTA. MK-2206 The samples were divided into four experimental groups and one control group. Group 1: resin composite Filtek (TM) P90; Group 2: glass Ionomer Vitremer (TM); Group 3: resin composite Filtek (TM) Z350 XT; Group 4: glass Ionomer Ketac (TM) N 100; Group 5: negative control (instrumented but not reinforced). After, the fracture test was performed using a fracture universal testing machine (Instron (TM)). The maximum values of resistance before catastrophic fracture were collected and analyzed by Anova (p = 0.05). The results show a significant difference between the groups compared (p = 0.02). A significant difference was found between group 1 (847.73 N) and group 5 (474.77 N) (p = 0.02) applying the Bonferroni test. Despite the limitations of the study, the conclusion is that micro-hybrid composite resins are ideal materials to strengthen teeth with incomplete root development endodontically treated.