## 3 Discussion  
The conventional ameloblastoma is known as the most aggressive type of ameloblastoma, the most common histopathological variants of which are the follicular and plexiform patterns [2,3]. Furthermore, conventional ameloblastoma demonstrates a higher rate of recurrence, and predominates over the unicyclic type from a histologic perspective [3]. Conventional ameloblastoma is most commonly associated with variably sized swellings of the jaw, which can be accompanied by facial deformity. Malocclusion and a loss of teeth also can be observed. However, pain or paresthesia is rare, and such a lesion might be associated with unerupted tooth [6,7]. In radiologic examination, conventional ameloblastoma can present in one of three patterns as a soap bubble appearance, beehive pattern, and the very important pattern for differential diagnosis, the unilocular form [7]. Upon histological analysis of this lesion, odontogenic epithelial islands can be observed. These islands are composed of hyperchromatic, palisading nuclei, showing reverse polarity. In addition, this lesion possess stellate reticulum-like cells and suprabasal cells, which compose loosely arranged angular cells [8]. The plexiform term refers to histologic appearance of basal cells in anastomosing strands with unobtrusive stellate reticulum, in which the stroma is usually delicate, and often with cyst like degeneration [9]. In immunohistochemistry analysis, plexiform amelblastoma expresses cytokeratin 8 (CK8) in all outermost cells and stellate reticulum cells in the inner portion of the tumor nest. CK19 is found in the outermost and inner cells. AE1/AE3 positivity is expressed in all cells, including the outermost, inner, and stellate reticulum cells. Polyclonal keratin (PK) positivity can be found at the outermost tumor cells. Plexiform amelblastoma also expresses Ki-67, which correlates with recurrence [10,11]. There are two types of treatment modalities for conventional ameloblastoma including conservative (marsupialization, enucleation, and curettage of the macroscopic lesion, simple bone resection, and decompression which was suggested by [PERSON]), and radical (maximlectomy or segmental mandibuctomy) [4,12]. Due to the high recurrence of conventional ameloblastoma, the radical treatment approach has been suggested by several authors. [PERSON] suggested radical treatment for conventional amelblastoma according to size and expansion. He suggested marginal resection for a small lesion, segmental resection for mandible inferior border expansion, and hemimandibulectomy for large lesion [13]. [PERSON] proposed en bloc resection, bone graft, implant placement, and prosthodonic  
Figure 6: The timeline of historical and current information from this episode of care. POD: Post-operative day. reconstruction for aggressive pediatric ameloblastoma [14]. However, the radical treatment approach for pediatric patients remains controversial due to its effects on growth and craniofacial and dental development. Contrary to [PERSON] and [PERSON], [PERSON] et al. proposed conservative treatment for pediatric ameloblastoma using decompression followed by enucleation with peripheral osteotomy along with routine self-irrigation and follow-up. They do not suggest to treat pediatric ameloblastoma radically, due to the radical treatments do not guarantee the absence of recurrence and it will affect the dentocraniofacial development and growth. When pediatric ameloblastoma recurs after radical treatment, more extensive and thorough resection of the surrounding soft tissue will be needed. According to [PERSON], conservative treatment of pediatric ameloblastoma provides good results and in the event of recurrence, a second surgery can be successful [12]. [PERSON] et al. suggested conservative treatment with long-term follow-up for pediatric conventional ameloblastoma, such as curettage with marsupialization, in which the marsupialization helps the evaluation of bone healing and recurrence.