Page 17
DENTISTRY 15. Lenters M, van Amerongen WE, Mandari GJ. Iatrogenic damage to the adjacent surface of primary molars in three different ways of cavity preparation. Eur Archives Paed Dent 2006;1(1):6-10. 16. Hickel R, Kaaden C, Paschos E, Buerkle V, García-Godoy F, Manhart J. Longevity of occlusally-stressed restorations in posterior primary teeth. Am J Dent 2005;18(3): 198-211. 17. Dhar V, Marghalani AA, Crystal YO, et al. Use of vital pulp therapies in primary teeth with deep caries lesions. Pediatr Dent 2017;39(5):E146-E159. 18. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Pulp therapy for primary and immature permanent teeth. Pediatr Dent 2018;40(6):343-51. 19. Bjørndal L, Reit C, Bruun G, et al. Treatment of deep caries lesions in adults: Randomized clinical trials comparing stepwise vs. direct complete excavation, and direct pulp capping vs. partial pulpotomy. Eur J Oral Sci 2010; 118(3):290-7. 20. Maltz M, Garcia R, Jardim JJ, et al. Randomized trial of partial vs. stepwise caries removal: 3-year follow-up. J Dent Res 2012;91(11):1026-31. 21. Maltz M, Jardim JJ, Mestrinho HD, et al. Partial removal of carious dentine: A multicenter randomized controlled trial and 18-month follow-up results. Caries Res 2013; 47(2):103-9. 22. Innes NP, Evans DJ, Stirrups DR. Sealing caries in primary molars: Randomized control trial, 5-year results. J Dent Res 2011;90(12):1405-10. 23. Lula EC, Monteiro-Neto V, Alves CM, Ribeiro CC. Microbiological analysis after complete or partial removal of carious dentin in primary teeth: A randomized clinical trial. Caries Res 2009;43(5):354-8. 24. Orhan AI, Oz FT, Orhan K. Pulp exposure occurrence and outcomes after 1- or 2-visit indirect pulp therapy vs. complete caries removal in primary and permanent molars. Pediatr Dent 2010;32(4):347-55. 25. Ricketts D, Lamont T, Innes NPT, Kidd E, Clarkson JE. Operative caries management in adults and children (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;3:54. 26. Foley J, Evans D, Blackwell A. Partial caries removal and cariostatic materials in carious primary molar teeth: A randomised controlled clinical trial. Br Dent J 2004;197 (11):697-701. 27. Phonghanyudh A, Phantumvanit P, Songpaisan Y, Petersen PE. Clinical evaluation of three caries removal approaches in primary teeth: A randomised controlled trial. Community Dent Health 2012;29(2):173-8. 28. Schwendicke F, Dorfer CE, Paris S. Incomplete caries removal: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res 2013;92(4):306-14. 29. Mertz-Fairhurst EJ, Curtis JW Jr, Ergle JW, Rueggeberg FA, Adair SM. Ultraconservative and cariostatic sealed restorations: Results at year 10. J Am Dent Assoc 1998; 129(1):55-66. 30. Paris S, Hopfenmuller W, Meyer-Lueck Dental caries is a major public health problem globally. Despite much effort in health promotion and disease prevention, dental restorations are still needed. Dental amalgam, a restorative material that contains mercury, has been widely used for some 150 years. In the past decades, the awareness and recognition of the environmental implications of mercury have increased and alternative filling materials have become increasingly more popular. Jointly with the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has strengthened the work to reduce risks to human health and the environment from the use and release of mercury. UNEP is supporting the work of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee established to elaborate a legally binding instrument on mercury. The mandate of this committee is set out in UNEP Governing Council decision 25/5. In seeking to reduce mercury use and release, the treaty may have implications on the delivery of oral health care worldwide. On this background, the WHO Global Oral Health Programme - in cooperation with UNEP Chemicals - organized a two-day meeting to discuss the implications and the way forward. The aim of the meeting was to assess the scientific evidence available on dental restorative materials and the implications to countries of using alternatives to amalgam for dental restorative care. Twenty-nine participants from 15 countries of all 6 WHO regions attended the meeting, representing international oral health researchers, scientists, university