Osteofibrous Dysplasia Versus Ossifying Fibroma: Semantic Confusion

Abstract

We are slightly puzzled by the recent article regarding neglected cases of ossifying fibroma (OF) of the jaws. 1 Veyssière A. Ambroise B. Traoré H. et al. Management of large maxillomandibular osteofibrous dysplasia as part of a humanitarian mission. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 75: 436.e1 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (2) Google Scholar Veyssière et al 1 Veyssière A. Ambroise B. Traoré H. et al. Management of large maxillomandibular osteofibrous dysplasia as part of a humanitarian mission. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 75: 436.e1 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (2) Google Scholar chose to use the term “osteofibrous dysplasia” (OFD) to describe massive OFs in African patients from underdeveloped countries. In our opinion, “maxillomandibular OFD” in the title of their article lacks the terminologic accuracy in the context of fibro-osseous jaw lesions and appears to have led to unnecessary confusion, considering that the term in current use is OF. Management of Large Maxillomandibular Osteofibrous Dysplasia as Part of a Humanitarian MissionJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryVol. 75Issue 2PreviewMaxillomandibular ossifying fibroma is a benign tumor that affects young adults. Complete excision can allow satisfactory management with no recurrence. During a humanitarian mission, one is confronted with many types of damage from these fibromas. Their management requires wide resection (mandibulectomy interrupter or maxillectomy) and free flap reconstruction. However, technical conditions during a humanitarian mission might not allow the performance of a free flap reconstruction. How can such patients be managed? Should these patients receive a straightforward intervention performed on site during the mission or should they go to another country with a technical platform suitable for microsurgical reconstruction? Full-Text PDF