Roberta Rayra Martins‐Chaves
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Roberta Rayra Martins‐Chaves has a total of 5 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Medicine, Faculty of Odontology Malmö University Malmö Sweden
1 shared publication - Felipe Paiva Fonseca
Department of Oral Surgery and Pathology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
1 shared publication - Flávia Sirotheau Correa Pontes
Universidade federal do Pará
1 shared publication - Hélder Antônio Rebelo Pontes
Service of Oral Pathology, João de Barros Barreto University Hospital, Federal University of Pará, Belém, Brazil
1 shared publication - Ricardo Santiago Gomez
Department of Oral Surgery and Pathology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 5 August 2022
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine
- Vol. 51 (7) , 603-610
Comparison of survival outcomes between ameloblastic carcinoma and metastasizing ameloblastoma: A systematic review
Purpose: To investigate and compare the demographic data, occurrence of recurrence and metastasis, and survival prognosis between ameloblastic carcinoma (AC) and metastasizing ameloblastoma (MA), based on appropriate and currently accepted eligible diagnostic criteria, in a systematic review of the literature.Methods: An electronic search was undertaken, last updated in December 2021. Eligibility criteria included publications having enough clinicopathological information to confirm the diagnosis of these tumors.Results: Seventy‐seven publications reporting 85 ACs and 43 MAs were included. Both tumors were more frequent in mandible and showed different clinical profiles regarding patients' sex and age. There was no difference in the estimated cumulative survival between patients diagnosed with these tumors. Metastases mainly affected the lungs, followed by cervical lymph nodes. The mean time between the first metastasis and the last follow‐up was higher for MA (p = 0.021). In addition, MA patients remained alive longer than AC patients after the first metastasis diagnosis (p = 0.041). Considering only the cases that metastasized, a higher ratio of AC patients died in comparison to MA patients (p = 0.003). The occurrence of recurrence was associated with a conservative primary treatment with both AC (p < 0.001) and MA tumors (p = 0.017). Multiple recurrent events were associated with conservative primary therapies with MA (p < 0.001) but not with AC (p = 0.121).Conclusion: In addition to some demographic differences, ACs that metastasize present a worse prognosis than MA. As conservative procedures are associated with multiple recurrent events, this treatment modality should be avoided for both tumors.
- 5 August 2022
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine
- Vol. 51 (7) , 603-610
Open AccessComparison of survival outcomes between ameloblastic carcinoma and metastasizing ameloblastoma: A systematic review
Purpose: To investigate and compare the demographic data, occurrence of recurrence and metastasis, and survival prognosis between ameloblastic carcinoma (AC) and metastasizing ameloblastoma (MA), based on appropriate and currently accepted eligible diagnostic criteria, in a systematic review of the literature.Methods: An electronic search was undertaken, last updated in December 2021. Eligibility criteria included publications having enough clinicopathological information to confirm the diagnosis of these tumors.Results: Seventy‐seven publications reporting 85 ACs and 43 MAs were included. Both tumors were more frequent in mandible and showed different clinical profiles regarding patients' sex and age. There was no difference in the estimated cumulative survival between patients diagnosed with these tumors. Metastases mainly affected the lungs, followed by cervical lymph nodes. The mean time between the first metastasis and the last follow‐up was higher for MA (p = 0.021). In addition, MA patients remained alive longer than AC patients after the first metastasis diagnosis (p = 0.041). Considering only the cases that metastasized, a higher ratio of AC patients died in comparison to MA patients (p = 0.003). The occurrence of recurrence was associated with a conservative primary treatment with both AC (p < 0.001) and MA tumors (p = 0.017). Multiple recurrent events were associated with conservative primary therapies with MA (p < 0.001) but not with AC (p = 0.121).Conclusion: In addition to some demographic differences, ACs that metastasize present a worse prognosis than MA. As conservative procedures are associated with multiple recurrent events, this treatment modality should be avoided for both tumors.