Little is known about the long–term effects of fluoride–releasing materials on carious dentine in vivo. The aim was to investigate the 2–year influence of a resin–modified glass ionomer cement (RM–GIC) and amalgam on the bacteriological counts of carious dentine that remained under class I restorations. To enable a split–mouth design, 33 molar pairs in 33 patients (mean age 15.1 years, SD 1.4) were selected, based on clinically and radiographically diagnosed occlusal dentine caries. The enamel of the carious molars was removed, and the carious dentine was sampled under aseptic conditions just beneath the dentinoenamel junction. The molars were alternately restored with RM–GIC or amalgam without further removal of carious dentine. The samples were processed for microbiological determination of total viable counts (TVC), mutans streptococci (MS), and lactobacilli (LB). The molar pairs of 25 patients were reevaluated after 2 years using the same clinical techniques and were permanently restored after complete caries removal. Both materials showed a substantial decrease in numbers of TVC and LB of the carious dentine after the 2–year period. Compared to amalgam, the decrease in the numbers of LB was significantly more pronounced for RM–GIC. No microorganisms were detected in only 11 molars (6 RM–GIC and 5 amalgam) after the 2–year period. Based on this study, we suggest that complete removal of carious dentine is still the best conservative treatment, irrespective of the restorative material used.

SUV can be used to predict resectability; however, SUV is not an independent factor that can be used to assess survival in patients with esophageal cancer.

Since the literature is very limited standard implementation of FDG-PET/CT into the tumour delineation process for radiation treatment seems unjustified and needs further clinical validation first.

The occlusal bite-wing radiograph evaluations of 13114-year-old and of 12317-and 20-year-old Dutch persons were compared with the clinically collected observations. The clinical observations and the bite-wing radiographs were collected as part of a longitudinal epidemiological survey conducted in 1987 and 1990. Comparison of the evaluations of the first and second molar teeth showed significantly more radiolucencies in all three age groups than expected clinically. Of the clinically judged ‘sound’ surfaces, 26% in the 14-, 37.5% in the 17- and 50% in the 20-year-old group showed a radiolucency on the bite-wing radiograph. In the 14-, 17- and 20-year-old age group a radiolucency was noticed on the bite-wing radiograph in 32,44 and 58% of the sealed teeth, respectively. The radiolucencies below the occlusal enamel of sealed teeth were most likely due to the problems in diagnosing occlusal dentine lesions correctly with the clinical diagnostic methods. Therefore not only approximal but also occlusal bite-wing radiograph judgement before sealant application seems to be advisable now. Because of the numbers of clinically undetected lesions it may be advisable to reconsider the criteria for occlusal diagnosis in epidemiological surveys and to judge not only the approximal but also the occlusal surfaces in epidemiological surveys when bite-wing radiographs are available.

Due to the changed treatment approach of proximal caries and the amalgam controversy, clinicians are in search for new materials. The aim of the present study was to compare amalgam with an adhesive material in deciduous molars in a clinical, split–mouth design study. At baseline 30 polyacid modified composite (Dyract^®) and 30 amalgam (Tytin^®) restorations were placed in primary molars, of which 24 and 17 could be evaluated after 24 and 36 months, respectively. Modified USPHS criteria were used for clinical evaluation every 6 months. Annual bite–wing radiographs were taken for evaluation of recurrent caries and cervical gap formation. In the present study, for Dyract as well as for Tytin restorations, low rates of recurrent caries were found, while Dyract restorations showed a better marginal adaptation and surface texture compared to Tytin restorations. In the Dyract group more radiolucencies were found at baseline. In both groups no patient complaint or pain was reported related to the radiolucencies. After 3 years the colour of Dyract was not comparable to the original. For Dyract no excessive wear was noticed compared to enamel. During the study one Dyract (recurrent caries: 18 months) and two Tytin (pulpal aetiology: 6 months, recurrent caries: 36 months) restorations had to be replaced. Even though the restorations were placed in caries risk children, at the 36 months’ evaluation of this clinical study, the results indicate that Dyract can be an alternative for Tytin in the primary dentition.