The term \u201cepulis\u201d was first introduced in 1979 to describe common periodontal lesions in dogs. Suggested terms for common gingival lesions with similar histopathologic appearances (background stroma resembling the periodontal ligament) were acanthomatous epulis, fibromatous epulis, and ossifying epulis. However, the term \u201cepulis\u201d is nondescript and does not accurately characterize the biological behavior of those common odontogenic lesions. Specifically, epulis does not account for the fact that all 3 lesions are not truly benign and that they require vastly different treatments.<\/p>\n
Updated nomenclature has been implemented and should be adopted to allow for accurate communication between pathologists, clinicians, and clients. This article describes current nomenclature, clinical and radiographic characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment for canine acanthomatous ameloblastoma (previously called acanthomatous epulis), peripheral odontogenic fibroma (POF, previously called fibromatous epulis), and POF-ossifying type (previously called ossifying epulis). Closely related lesions, including other variants of ameloblastoma and focal fibrous hyperplasia, are also briefly described.<\/p>\n
Take-Home Points<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/div><\/div><\/p>\n The term \u201cepulis\u201d stems from the Greek words \u201cepi\u201d and \u201coulon,\u201d which mean \u201con the gum.\u201d Epulis is broadly defined as any nonspecific gingival overgrowth. The term gained common acceptance in reference to canine odontogenic tumors in 1979.1-3<\/sup> In that historical publication, the authors proposed that 3 common gingival lesions be broadly categorized as \u201cperiodontal epulides\u201d because they all share background stroma that resembles the periodontal ligament (PDL).3<\/sup> Specifically, those 3 lesions were termed acanthomatous epulis, fibromatous epulis, and ossifying epulis based on distinct histopathologic features. 2-3<\/sup><\/span><\/p>\n Using the term \u201cepulis\u201d is now widely discouraged because it is nondescript and suggests that the lesion is benign. Even today, the phrase \u201cit\u2019s just an epulis\u201d is used in daily practice. Yet a subset of such lesions, specifically acanthomatous epulis, can be highly invasive and must be treated. Therefore, odontogenic tumors have been reclassified on the basis of their cell of origin (i.e., epithelial, mesenchymal, or mixed), similar to the odontogenic tumor classification system used in humans. The most up-to-date classification for dogs and cats can be found in the Histological Classification of Tumors of the Alimentary System of Domestic Animals<\/i>.4<\/sup> <\/span><\/p>\n Although proper nomenclature for these lesions has been controversial, the current body of literature supports canine acanthomatous ameloblastoma (CAA) as the preferred term for acanthomatous epulis, peripheral odontogenic fibroma (POF) as the preferred term for fibromatous epulis, and POF-ossifying type as the preferred term for ossifying epulis. This article describes the clinical and radiographic characteristics, diagnostic workup, and treatment for ameloblastoma, including variants other than CAA, as well as POF, including ossifying and nonossifying types. <\/span><\/p>\n Ameloblastoma is an epithelial odontogenic tumor that is common in dogs and rare in cats.5-7<\/sup> It often presents as an erythematous, cauliflower-like gingival mass closely associated with the teeth. However, if the lesion arises from an intraosseous (within the jaw) location, it may appear as a gingival swelling with bony expansion (<\/span>FIGURE 1<\/b><\/span>). <\/span><\/p>\n\n
\nin dogs.<\/li>\n
\nin cats.<\/li>\nEpulis<\/h2>\n
Ameloblastoma<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/navc.sitepreview.app\/todaysveterinarypractice.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2024\/06\/Goldschmidt_TVPJulAug24_Epulides_Fig1A.png\")