Osteofibrous Dysplasia 

  • Author: Robert Mervyn Letts, MD, FRCS(C), FACS; Chief Editor: Harris Gellman, MD   more...
 
Updated: Sep 29, 2010
 

Background

Osteofibrous dysplasia is a rare, nonneoplastic condition of unknown etiology that affects the long bones. It frequently is asymptomatic.[1]

Most lesions of osteofibrous dysplasia affect the cortex of the tibia, predominantly the middle third of the diaphysis, as seen in the image below. The cortex often is expanded and thinned, with multiple radiolucencies mixed with intervening areas of sclerosis. The second most common site of involvement is the fibula.

Radiograph of osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia Radiograph of osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia in a 5-year-old girl

Numerous cases of osteofibrous dysplasia affecting the tibia have been reported. Sweet et al reported 30 cases, with ipsilateral fibular involvement in 5 cases (17%).[2] In another study of 10 children with tibial lesions, one case (10%) showed ipsilateral fibular involvement. Campanacci and Laus reported 35 cases; the tibia was affected in each case, with ipsilateral involvement of the fibula in 4 cases (11%).[3] Further, 22 of 35 lesions (63%) affected the middle third of the tibial diaphysis. Ishida et al found 11 of 12 lesions (92%) in the tibia, with one lesion in the ulna.[4] Most of these tibial lesions affected the proximal diaphysis.

Bilateral involvement is rare. However, in a study of 5 children by Ozaki et al, one child presented with bilateral lesions of both ulnae and tibiae.[5] The tibia was affected in the remaining 4 children, with one having ipsilateral fibular involvement.

Wang et al reported one case of a lesion affecting the radius, and Schlitter reported the case of a lesion in the humerus.[6, 7]

Osteofibrous dysplasia of the mandible, which occurs exclusively in adults, commonly is referred to as ossifying fibroma.

Next

History of the Procedure

Frangenheim first described the lesion in 1921 and reported it as a congenital osteitis fibrosa.[8] Subsequently, Kempson reported 2 cases affecting the tibia of young children and named the lesion ossifying fibroma.[9] In 1981, Campanacci and Laus studied 35 cases and coined the term osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia and fibula.[3] They proposed this term to replace the use of ossifying fibroma because of the supposed congenital origin of the condition, the histologic resemblance to fibrous dysplasia, and the apparent exclusive involvement of the tibia and fibula.[10] Osteofibrous dysplasia is occasionally referred to as Campanacci syndrome.

Previous
Next

Epidemiology

Frequency

Osteofibrous dysplasia usually is diagnosed in children under 10 years, with a peak incidence in children aged 1-5 years. Several occurrences in newborns have also been reported.[11, 12] Adults diagnosed with de novo osteofibrous dysplasia have been reported, the oldest patient being age 39 years at diagnosis.[2]

The reported mean age at diagnosis has been variable. Sweet et al and Ishida et al reported an average age over 10 years.[2, 4] In contrast, Komiya and Inoue, Ozaki et al, and Campanacci and Laus reported an average age younger than 10 years.[3, 5, 13]

No significant sex preponderance has been reported consistently, although several studies have found a slight male predilection. Sweet et al reported 16 males in their 30 patients.[2] Campanacci and Laus noted that 21 of 35 patients (60%) in their series were male.[3] This represents the largest reported sex preponderance. In contrast, Park et al reported 38 males and 42 females in their series of 80 patients.[14]

Previous
Next

Etiology

The etiology of osteofibrous dysplasia, as well as the cell of origin, is unknown. Only one description of familial osteofibrous dysplasia has been reported.[15]

Osteofibrous dysplasia has been postulated to arise from a fibrovascular abnormality. Johnson proposed a relationship between osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma on the basis of a common causative factor — namely, a fibrovascular defect.[16] According to this theory, osteofibrous dysplasia results from an abnormality in the Haversian canals, whereas adamantinoma develops secondary to a defect of intramedullary vasculature.

Komiya and Inoue reported similar findings and suggested a deficiency in blood flow within the periosteum as the etiologic factor in osteofibrous dysplasia.[13] Bridge et al investigated the cytogenetics of osteofibrous dysplasia.[17] They reported trisomy 12 in 2 distinct specimens from a lesion in an 11-year-old boy and trisomy 7, 8, and 22 in another boy. Studies of adamantinoma have revealed trisomy 7 and 12, suggesting a relationship between osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma.

Sherman et al reported the coexistence of adamantinoma and osteofibrous dysplasia in the same patient, providing additional evidence of a relationship between these 2 entities.[18] Several other abnormalities have been found within adamantinoma lesions; consequently, these chromosomal anomalies may not be pathogenetic.[19, 20] On the other hand, Sakamoto et al have shown mutations at the Arg 201 codon in persons with fibrous dysplasia but not in persons with osteofibrous dysplasia, suggesting a different pathogenesis for each lesion.[21]

Previous
Next

Presentation

Classically, osteofibrous dysplasia has been described as painless, with a localized, firm swelling of the tibia as the presenting complaint. The tibia frequently is bowed anteriorly or anterolaterally.[22]

Park et al reported that of 80 patients, 25% complained of pain, 12.5% had a pathologic fracture, 8.8% presented with tibial swelling, and 6.2% presented with deformity.[14] Sweet et al reported that 18 of 30 patients (60%) presented with complaints of pain, 13 (43%) with swelling, and 4 (13%) with deformity.[2] One lesion was an incidental finding.

Komiya and Inoue reported similar presenting complaints in a series of 10 cases.[13] Ishida et al reported a duration of symptoms in 11 of 12 patients ranging from 2 months to 5 years, with an average of 14 months; one lesion was asymptomatic.[4] Of 3 newborns with osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia, 2 had swelling and 1 had pathologic fracture.

Differential diagnosis

The differential diagnosis of osteofibrous dysplasia includes monostotic fibrous dysplasia, nonossifying fibroma, and adamantinoma. Fibrous dysplasia can be differentiated on the basis of several characteristics. Generally, it occurs in patients older than 10 years, more commonly affects the femur and ribs, and does not resolve spontaneously.

Radiographically, fibrous dysplasia appears as an intramedullary lesion with a ground-glass appearance.[23] On histologic examination, fibrous dysplasia is not bordered by active osteoblasts and is cytokeratin-negative.[24] Cytogenetically, fibrous dysplasia is related to anomalies affecting chromosomes 3 and 5. Sakamoto et al found that immunoreactivity for osteonectin in bone matrix is seen more commonly in osteofibrous dysplasia.[25] Nonossifying fibroma can be distinguished from osteofibrous dysplasia by several typical features. Nonossifying fibroma predominantly is a metaphyseal lesion. Histologically, it is characterized by a storiform pattern of spindle cells with scattered multinucleated giant cells, is not bordered by active osteoblasts, and is cytokeratin-negative.

More challenging is the distinction between osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma.[26] Accurate differentiation between these 2 lesions is essential for correct diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Adamantinoma has a similar predilection for the cortex of long bones, particularly the tibia, and may have radiologic and histologic findings similar to those of osteofibrous dysplasia.[27, 28] However, adamantinoma can be distinguished from osteofibrous dysplasia by the presence of soft-tissue extension, intramedullary involvement, periosteal reaction in the absence of pathologic fracture, and the histologic finding of hyperchromatic epithelial islands. Adamantinoma typically manifests with a larger, more painful lesion and is usually found in patients older than 10 years.

However, as suggested by Kuruvilla and Steiner, it is likely that osteofibrous dysplasia is part of the morphologic spectrum of adamantinoma.[29] Kanamori et al found that extra copies of chromosomes 7, 8, 12, 19, and 21 recur in adamantinoma.[30] These aneuploidies may be useful in differentiating adamantinoma from osteofibrous dysplasia.

Previous
Next

Indications

Due to the high recurrence rate, many authors advocate nonoperative treatment of the lesion until after skeletal maturity is reached, at which time marginal resection and bone grafting may be performed without increased risk of recurrence. For patients of any age, surgical correction of associated deformities may be required. Surgery may be indicated if the lesion is aggressive or if the patient experiences multiple pathologic fractures. Resection of large portions of the lesion usually is not necessary and only increases susceptibility to recurrent fractures.

Previous
Next

Relevant Anatomy

The tibia is a tubular long bone with a triangular shape in cross section. The bone is surrounded by 4 fascial compartments. The anteromedial surface lies subcutaneously and therefore has no soft-tissue protection. The primary center of ossification appears at 7 weeks of gestation. The proximal ossific nucleus appears soon after birth and fuses with the metaphysis at approximately age 16 years. The distal ossific nucleus appears at age 2 years and fuses at age 15 years. In some, separate centers of ossification exist for the medial malleolus and tibial tubercle.

The vascular supply to the tibia is provided predominantly by the posterior tibial artery, from which the nutrient artery enters the tibia at the origin of the soleus muscle along the oblique line of the tibia. The nutrient artery of the tibia has 3 ascending branches and 1 descending branch. The distal aspect of the tibia is supplied by periosteal anastomoses that enter the bone adjacent to the ankle joint.

Previous
Next

Contraindications

Though nonoperative management is recommended in patients who are skeletally immature, there are no absolute contraindications to surgical intervention in children, with the exception of any underlying medical or anesthetic issues. Operative management is not recommended in patients who are skeletally immature, because of the high recurrence rate following resection and curettage and because of the predisposition to fracturing after the bone has been weakened by biopsy. Pathologic fracture does not necessarily require surgical management, since cast immobilization frequently results in good healing.

Previous
Proceed to Workup
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Robert Mervyn Letts, MD, FRCS(C), FACS  Former Chief, Department of Surgery, Division of Pediatric Orthopedics, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, University of Ottawa; Consultant Pediatric Orthopedic Surgeon, Sheikh Khalifa Medical City, UAE

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Darin Davidson, MD  Resident, Department of Orthopedics, University of British Columbia

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Lynn A Crosby, MD, FACS  Chief of Shoulder Division, Professor, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Wright State University School of Medicine

Lynn A Crosby, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American College of Sports Medicine, American College of Surgeons, American Fracture Association, American Medical Association, American Medical Tennis Association, American Orthopaedic Association, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society, Arthroscopy Association of North America, Mid-America Orthopaedic Association, and Orthopaedic Research Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD  Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine

Disclosure: eMedicine Salary Employment

Sean P Scully, MD, PhD  Professor, Department of Orthopedics, University of Miami

Sean P Scully, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, and Society of Surgical Oncology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Dinesh Patel, MD, FACS  Associate Clinical Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School; Chief of Arthroscopic Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital

Dinesh Patel, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Harris Gellman, MD  Consulting Surgeon, Broward Hand Center; Voluntary Clinical Professor of Orthopedic Surgery and Plastic Surgery, Departments of Orthopedic Surgery and Surgery, University of Miami School of Medicine

Harris Gellman, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Medical Acupuncture, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American Orthopaedic Association, American Society for Surgery of the Hand, and Arkansas Medical Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References
  1. McCaffrey M, Letts M, Carpenter B, et al. Osteofibrous dysplasia: a review of the literature and presentation of an additional 3 cases. Am J Orthop. Oct 2003;32(10):479-86. [Medline].

  2. Sweet DE, Vinh TN, Devaney K. Cortical osteofibrous dysplasia of long bone and its relationship to adamantinoma. A clinicopathologic study of 30 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. Mar 1992;16(3):282-90. [Medline].

  3. Campanacci M, Laus M. Osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia and fibula. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Mar 1981;63(3):367-75. [Medline].

  4. Ishida T, Iijima T, Kikuchi F. A clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study of osteofibrous dysplasia, differentiated adamantinoma, and adamantinoma of long bones. Skeletal Radiol. 1992;21(8):493-502. [Medline].

  5. Ozaki T, Hamada M, Sugihara S. Treatment outcome of osteofibrous dysplasia. J Pediatr Orthop B. Jul 1998;7(3):199-202. [Medline].

  6. Wang JW, Shih CH, Chen WJ. Osteofibrous dysplasia (ossifying fibroma of long bones). A report of four cases and review of the literature. Clin Orthop. May 1992;(278):235-43. [Medline].

  7. Schlitter HE. [2 Benign bone tumors with unusual localization & spontaneous fracture.]. Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Nuklearmed. Feb 1958;88(2):195-200. [Medline].

  8. Frangenheim P. Angeborene Ostitis Fibrosa als Ursache einer Intrauterinen Unterschenkelfraktur. Arch Klin Chir. 1921;117:22-9.

  9. Kempson RL. Ossifying fibroma of the long bones. A light and electron microscopic study. Arch Pathol. Sep 1966;82(3):218-33. [Medline].

  10. Campanacci M. Osteofibrous dysplasia of long bones a new clinical entity. Ital J Orthop Traumatol. Aug 1976;2(2):221-37. [Medline].

  11. Anderson MJ, Townsend DR, Johnston JO. Osteofibrous dysplasia in the newborn. Report of a case. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Feb 1993;75(2):265-7. [Medline].

  12. Hindman BW, Bell S, Russo T. Neonatal osteofibrous dysplasia: report of two cases. Pediatr Radiol. 1996;26(4):303-6. [Medline].

  13. Komiya S, Inoue A. Aggressive bone tumorous lesion in infancy: osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia and fibula. J Pediatr Orthop. Sep-Oct 1993;13(5):577-81. [Medline].

  14. Park YK, Unni KK, McLeod RA. Osteofibrous dysplasia: clinicopathologic study of 80 cases. Hum Pathol. Dec 1993;24(12):1339-47. [Medline].

  15. Hunter AG, Jarvis J. Osteofibrous dysplasia: two affected male sibs and an unrelated girl with bilateral involvement. Am J Med Genet. Sep 15 2002;112(1):79-85. [Medline].

  16. Johnson LC. Congenital pseudarthrosis, adamantinoma of long bone and intracortical fibrous dysplasia of the tibia. J Bone Joint Surg. 1972;54-A:1355.

  17. Bridge JA, Dembinski A, DeBoer J. Clonal chromosomal abnormalities in osteofibrous dysplasia. Implications for histopathogenesis and its relationship with adamantinoma. Cancer. Mar 15 1994;73(6):1746-52. [Medline].

  18. Sherman GM, Damron TA, Yang Y. CD99 positive adamantinoma of the ulna with ipsilateral discrete osteofibrous dysplasia. Clin Orthop. Mar 2003;256-61. [Medline].

  19. Mandahl N, Heim S, Rydholm A. Structural chromosome aberrations in an adamantinoma. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. Oct 15 1989;42(2):187-90. [Medline].

  20. Sozzi G, Miozzo M, Di Palma S. Involvement of the region 13q14 in a patient with adamantinoma of the long bones. Hum Genet. Oct 1990;85(5):513-5. [Medline].

  21. Sakamoto A, Oda Y, Iwamoto Y, Tsuneyoshi M. A comparative study of fibrous dysplasia and osteofibrous dysplasia with regard to Gsalpha mutation at the Arg201 codon: polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of paraffin-embedded tissues. J Mol Diagn. May 2000;2(2):67-72. [Medline].

  22. Campbell CJ, Hawk T. A variant of fibrous dysplasia (osteofibrous dysplasia). J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Feb 1982;64(2):231-6. [Medline].

  23. Grabias SL, Campbell CJ. Fibrous dysplasia. Orthop Clin North Am. Oct 1977;8(4):771-83. [Medline].

  24. Nakashima Y, Yamamuro T, Fujiwara Y. Osteofibrous dysplasia (ossifying fibroma of long bones). A study of 12 cases. Cancer. Sep 1 1983;52(5):909-14. [Medline].

  25. Sakamoto A, Oda Y, Iwamoto Y, Tsuneyoshi M. A comparative study of fibrous dysplasia and osteofibrous dysplasia with regard to expressions of c-fos and c-jun products and bone matrix proteins. Hum Pathol. Dec 1999;30(12):1418-26. [Medline].

  26. Most MJ, Sim FH, Inwards CY. Osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. Jun 2010;18(6):358-66. [Medline].

  27. Adler CP. Case report 587: Adamantinoma of the tibia mimicking osteofibrous dysplasia. Skeletal Radiol. 1990;19(1):55-8. [Medline].

  28. Weiss SW, Dorfman HD. Adamantinoma of long bone. An analysis of nine new cases with emphasis on metastasizing lesions and fibrous dysplasia-like changes. Hum Pathol. Mar 1977;8(2):141-53. [Medline].

  29. Kuruvilla G, Steiner GC. Osteofibrous dysplasia-like adamantinoma of bone: a report of five cases with immunohistochemical and ultrastructural studies. Hum Pathol. Aug 1998;29(8):809-14. [Medline].

  30. Kanamori M, Antonescu CR, Scott M, et al. Extra copies of chromosomes 7, 8, 12, 19, and 21 are recurrent in adamantinoma. J Mol Diagn. Feb 2001;3(1):16-21. [Medline].

  31. Wootton-Gorges SL. MR imaging of primary bone tumors and tumor-like conditions in children. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. Aug 2009;17(3):469-87, vi. [Medline].

  32. Moretti VM, Slotcavage RL, Crawford EA, Lackman RD, Ogilvie CM. Curettage and Graft Alleviates Athletic-Limiting Pain in Benign Lytic Bone Lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. May 12 2010;[Medline].

  33. Lee RS, Weitzel S, Eastwood DM, Monsell F, Pringle J, Cannon SR, et al. Osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia. Is there a need for a radical surgical approach?. J Bone Joint Surg Br. May 2006;88(5):658-64. [Medline].

  34. Hahn SB, Kim SH, Cho NH, Choi CJ, Kim BS, Kang HJ. Treatment of osteofibrous dysplasia and associated lesions. Yonsei Med J. Jun 30 2007;48(3):502-10. [Medline].

  35. Mankin HJ, Trahan CA, Fondren G, Mankin CJ. Non-ossifying fibroma, fibrous cortical defect and Jaffe-Campanacci syndrome: a biologic and clinical review. Chir Organi Mov. May 2009;93(1):1-7. [Medline].

  36. Goergen TG, Dickman PS, Resnick D. Long bone ossifying fibromas. Cancer. May 1977;39(5):2067-72. [Medline].

  37. Ben Arush MW, Ben Arieh Y, Bialik V. Synovial sarcoma associated with osteofibrous dysplasia. A case report and review of the literature. Am J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. Aug 1992;14(3):261-4. [Medline].

  38. Huvos AG, Higinbotham NL, Miller TR. Bone sarcomas arising in fibrous dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Jul 1972;54(5):1047-56. [Medline].

  39. Schwartz DT, Alpert M. The malignant transformation of fibrous dysplasia. Am J Med Sci. Jan 1964;247:1-20. [Medline].

  40. Witkin GB, Guilford WB, Siegal GP. Osteogenic sarcoma and soft tissue myxoma in a patient with fibrous dysplasia and hemoglobins JBaltimore and S. Clin Orthop. Mar 1986;(204):245-52. [Medline].

  41. Van Delm I, Fabry G. Osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia: case report and review of the literature. J Pediatr Orthop B. Jan 1999;8(1):50-3. [Medline].

  42. Kahn LB. Adamantinoma, osteofibrous dysplasia and differentiated adamantinoma. Skeletal Radiol. May 2003;32(5):245-58. [Medline].

  43. Maki M, Athanasou N. Osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma: correlation of proto-oncogene product and matrix protein expression. Hum Pathol. Jan 2004;35(1):69-74. [Medline].

  44. Dockerty MB, Meyerding HW. Adamantinoma of the tibia. JAMA. 1942;119:932-37.

  45. Markel SF. Ossifying fibroma of long bone: its distinction from fibrous dysplasia and its association with adamantinoma of long bone. Am J Clin Pathol. Jan 1978;69(1):91-7. [Medline].

  46. Schajowicz F, Santini-Araujo E. Adamantinoma of the tibia masked by fibrous dysplasia. Report of three cases. Clin Orthop. Jan 1989;(238):294-301. [Medline].

  47. Ueda Y, Blasius S, Edel G. Osteofibrous dysplasia of long bones--a reactive process to adamantinomatous tissue. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1992;118(2):152-6. [Medline].

  48. Czerniak B, Rojas-Corona RR, Dorfman HD. Morphologic diversity of long bone adamantinoma. The concept of differentiated (regressing) adamantinoma and its relationship to osteofibrous dysplasia. Cancer. Dec 1 1989;64(11):2319-34. [Medline].

  49. Springfield DS, Rosenberg AE, Mankin HJ. Relationship between osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma. Clin Orthop. Dec 1994;(309):234-44. [Medline].

  50. Gleason BC, Liegl-Atzwanger B, Kozakewich HP, Connolly S, Gebhardt MC, Fletcher JA, et al. Osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma in children and adolescents: a clinicopathologic reappraisal. Am J Surg Pathol. Mar 2008;32(3):363-76. [Medline].

  51. Mathew M, Joseph B. Differentiated adamantinoma: a case report and review of literature. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. Jul 2007;50(3):565-7. [Medline].

  52. Hazelbag HM, Taminiau AH, Fleuren GJ. Adamantinoma of the long bones. A clinicopathological study of thirty- two patients with emphasis on histological subtype, precursor lesion, and biological behavior. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Oct 1994;76(10):1482-99. [Medline].

  53. Hatori M, Watanabe M, Hosaka M, Sasano H, Narita M, Kokubun S. A classic adamantinoma arising from osteofibrous dysplasia-like adamantinoma in the lower leg: a case report and review of the literature. Tohoku J Exp Med. May 2006;209(1):53-9. [Medline].

  54. Cohen DM, Dahlin DC, Pugh DG. Fibrous dysplasia associated with adamantinoma of the long bones. Cancer. May-Jun 1962;15:515-21. [Medline].

  55. Jacobsen HG. Section III, case 14, In: Bone Disease (second series) Syllabus. Chicago: Waverly Press;1976: 233.

  56. Kitagawa T, Hayashi Y, Kimura O. [Osteogenic fibroma]. Seikei Geka. Oct 1968;19(11):906-12. [Medline].

  57. Schoenecker PL, Swanson K, Sheridan JJ. Ossifying fibroma of the tibia. Report of a new case and review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Mar 1981;63(3):483-8. [Medline].

  58. Stephenson RB, London MD, Hankin FM. Fibrous dysplasia. An analysis of options for treatment. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Mar 1987;69(3):400-9. [Medline].

  59. Stewart MJ, Gilmer WS, Edmonson AS. Fibrous dysplasia of bone. J Bone Joint Surg Br. May 1962;44-B:302-18. [Medline].

Previous
Next
 
Radiograph of osteofibrous dysplasia of the tibia in a 5-year-old girl
Characteristic radiographic findings of osteofibrous dysplasia. Note the eccentric intracortical lesion with sclerosis of the internal surface, bubbled appearance of the lesion, and anterior tibial bowing.
Typical histologic appearance of the lesion under 100X magnification. Note the zonal architecture with a periphery of active osteoblasts surrounding bone trabeculae.
Histologic section under 100X magnification demonstrating vascular channels within the lesion, which has been proposed as the etiologic factor in the development of the lesion
Histologic appearance of fibrous dysplasia revealing a similar appearance to osteofibrous dysplasia but lacking the periphery of active osteoblasts
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2012 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.