Behaviour of general dental practitioners in Germany regarding posterior restorations with flowable composites

Because the recommendation to use flowables for posterior restorations is still a matter of debate, the objective of this study was to determine in a nationwide survey in Germany how frequently, for what indications, and for what reasons, German dentists use flowable composites in posterior teeth. In addition, the acceptance of a simplified filling technique for posterior restorations using a low stress flowable composite was evaluated. Completed questionnaires from all over Germany were returned by 1,449 dentists resulting in a response rate of 48.5%; 78.6% of whom regularly used flowable composites for posterior restorations. The most frequent indications were cavity lining (80.1%) and small Class I fillings (74.2%). Flowables were less frequently used for small Class II fillings (22.7%) or other indications (13.6%). Most frequent reasons given for the use of flowables in posterior teeth were the prevention of voids (71.7%) and superior adaptation to cavity walls (72.9%), whereas saving time was considered less important (13.8%). Based on the subjective opinion of the dentists the simplified filling technique seemed to deliver advantages compared to the methods used to date particularly with regard to good cavity adaptation and ease of use. In conclusion, resin composites are the standard material type used for posterior restorations by general dental practitioners in Germany and most dentists use flowable composites as liners.

[Oral medicine: a specialty placed between medicine and dentistry]

Oral medicine is a dental specialty that bridges the traditional areas of health between dentistry and medicine. International descriptions reflect this and oral medicine is defined as "the dental speciality placed at the interface between medicine and dentistry and is concerned with the diagnosis and management of (non-dental) pathology affecting the oral and maxillofacial region." Oral medicine specialists provide clinical care to patients with a wide variety of orofacial conditions, including oral mucosal diseases, orofacial pain syndromes, salivary gland disorders, and oral manifestations of systemic diseases. There is a growing need to implement this specialty globally: due to the rapid progress in both medicine and dentistry, and to the growing percentage of senior citizens in many countries, the adequate diagnosis and treatment of oral diseases will become even more complex in the future. In this article, the authors' intention is to point out that oral medicine is neither a recognized specialty nor a distinct field of study in Germany, Austria, or Switzerland; thus, the need for postgraduate training in this field in countries where oral medicine is not a specialization is emphasized.

Novel hepatitis E virus genotype in Norway rats, Germany

Human hepatitis E virus infections may be caused by zoonotic transmission of virus genotypes 3 and 4. To determine whether rodents are a reservoir, we analyzed the complete nucleotide sequence of a hepatitis E–like virus from 2 Norway rats in Germany. The sequence suggests a separate genotype for this hepatotropic virus.

Current state of evidence on 'off-label' therapeutic options for systemic lupus erythematosus, including biological immunosuppressive agents, in Germany, Austria and Switzerland--a consensus report

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) can be a severe and potentially life-threatening disease that often represents a therapeutic challenge because of its heterogeneous organ manifestations. Only glucocorticoids, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide and very recently belimumab have been approved for SLE therapy in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Dependence on glucocorticoids and resistance to the approved therapeutic agents, as well as substantial toxicity, are frequent. Therefore, treatment considerations will include 'off-label' use of medication approved for other indications. In this consensus approach, an effort has been undertaken to delineate the limits of the current evidence on therapeutic options for SLE organ disease, and to agree on common practice. This has been based on the best available evidence obtained by a rigorous literature review and the authors' own experience with available drugs derived under very similar health care conditions. Preparation of this consensus document included an initial meeting to agree upon the core agenda, a systematic literature review with subsequent formulation of a consensus and determination of the evidence level followed by collecting the level of agreement from the panel members. In addition to overarching principles, the panel have focused on the treatment of major SLE organ manifestations (lupus nephritis, arthritis, lung disease, neuropsychiatric and haematological manifestations, antiphospholipid syndrome and serositis). This consensus report is intended to support clinicians involved in the care of patients with difficult courses of SLE not responding to standard therapies by providing up-to-date information on the best available evidence.