Histomorphological evaluation, cell proliferation and endothelial immunostaining in oral and maxillofacial myofibroblastic lesions.

BACKGROUND

Myofibroblasts (MF) are mesenchymal cells with features of both fibroblasts and smooth muscle cells. Although these are usually reactive cells, they can lead to myofibroblastic tumors that may share clinical and histomorphological characteristics but with different prognosis. The aim of this study is to perform a histomorphological evaluation as well as to compare and evaluate two different cell proliferation immunomarkers and two endothelial markers in a group of oral and maxillofacial myofibroblastic lesions (MFL).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional and retrospective study. Demographic, clinical, histomorphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of 39 cases of MFL were analyzed. Immunohistochemical reactions were performed with the Ki67, MCM2, CD34 and CD105 antibodies. Kruskal-Wallis test and Spearman correlation analysis were used.

RESULTS

Four cases of nodular fasciitis (NF), 18 myofibromas (My), 6 desmoplastic fibromas (DF), 7 inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors (IMT) and 4 myofibroblastic sarcomas (MFS) were studied. There were twenty women (51.2%); the median age was 13 [Q1-Q3: 8-24] years and most cases occurred in the mandible (48.7%). A statistically significant difference with MCM2 immunostaining (p=0.0221) was observed between the MFL; furthermore, a correlation between CD34 and CD105 immunostaining in NF (p <0.0001) and IMT (p=0.0408), between MCM2 and CD34 in IMT (p=0.0362) and between MCM2 and CD105 in MFS (p <0001) were found.

CONCLUSIONS

MCM2 immunostaining could assess more clearly the cell growth fraction in MFL. The correlation between MCM2 and CD34 in IMT and between MCM2 and CD105 in MFS are indicative of the high activity of these lesions. These results emphasize the importance of the studied immunohistochemistry markers as possible tools for a better characterization of some of the MFL.