Ravindranath Acharya1, Syed Mohammed Yaseen2* and Satish Yadav3
1Assistant professor, Division of Pediatric Dentistry, PullaReddy Dental College & Hospital, Kurnool, India
2Assistant Professor, Division of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
3Assistant Professor, Division of oral pathology, Government Dental College, Bellary, India
Received:09 September, 2014;Accepted: 03 August, 2015;Published: 06 August, 2015
Syed Mohammed Yaseen, Division of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, E-mail:
Ravindranath A, Yaseen SM, Satish Y (2015) Peripheral Ossifying Fibroma in Infant: A Case Report. J Dent Probl Solut 2(2): 038-40. 10.17352/2394-8418.000015
© 2015 Ravindranath A, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Peripheral ossifying fibroma; Gingival overgrowth; Pyogenic granuloma; Peripheral cemento-ossifying fibroma
Peripheral ossifying fibroma is a relatively common gingival growth of reactive rather than neoplastic in nature. Clinically differentiating one from the other as a specific lesion is often difficult and requires histopathology examination. It predominantly affects adolescents and young adults, but rarely seen in infants. We report here a clinical case of peripheral ossifying fibroma in a 3 month old infant .clinical and histopathological features along with etiopathogenesis and differential diagnosis are also discussed.
Peripheral ossifying fibroma (POF) is a relatively common gingival growth that is considered to be reactive in nature and postulated to appear secondary to irritation or trauma. POF is defined as a well demarcated and occasionally encapsulated lesion consisting of fibrous tissue containing variable amounts of mineralized material resembling bone . In 1982  recommended that the only term used to describe this entity should be POF. Clinically, POFs are sessile or pedunculated, usually ulcerated and erythematous or exhibit a color similar to the surrounding gingiva. Most lesions are < 2cm in size, although larger ones occasionally occur. Furthermore, the lesions have female predilection and recurrence rate is considered high for benign reactive proliferation. POF is seen usually in teenagers and young adults, with an occurrence peak between the ages of 10 and 19 years. In a literature review revealed the youngest reported age of POF was in a 7-month-old infant. The purpose of this report is to present a case of peripheral ossifying fibroma in a 3 month old infant .
A three month old female infant was presented to Division of Pediatric Dentistry, by her parents with a complaint of a lump in her lower front region of the mouth which caused interference in nursing. Child was healthy and history revealed that, she was born, following completion of full term pregnancy without any complication. The only unusual finding at birth was two mandibular anterior natal teeth. Of the two natal teeth, one was extremely mobile and causing discomfort in nursing was extracted when the child was 40 days old. Few days following extraction, a small blister like lesion developed in the extraction site, which gradually increased to present size causing discomfort while nursing. According to the parents, the patient had difficulty when she was nursed because of the lump. Parents were very concerned regarding the lesion whether it may affect her facial appearance.
Extra-oral examination revealed no findings of clinical significance. Intra oral examination revealed a fibrous nodular mass with a sessile base in the mandibular anterior region measuring about 0.5 x 1.5 centimetres (Figure 1).The lesion appeared reddish pink with areas of white and rubbery in consistency. The lesion was tender to firm pressure but not to light palpation. However, the lesion was non fluctuant and did not blanch under pressure. Based on these findings and the history, the differential diagnosis consisted of irritation fibroma, pyogenic granuloma, and peripheral giant cell granuloma. Radiographic examination was not attempted as the parents did not want the baby to be exposed to any radiation.