There is in vitro evidence that some of these alternatives are also mutagenic although longterm health consequences are unclear. Allergies to some of these substances have been reported, both in patients and in dental personnel. However, information on the toxicological profile of alternative materials and clinical data on possible adverse effects of alternatives are very limited. The SCENIHR concludes that current evidence does not preclude the use of either amalgam or alternative materials in dental restorative treatment. However, the choice of material should be based on patient characteristics such as primary or permanent teeth, pregnancy, the presence of allergies to mercury or other components of restorative materials, and the presence of impaired renal clearance.
The SCENIHR recognises that there is a need for further research, particularly relating to (i)evaluation of the potential neurotoxicity of mercury from dental amalgam and the effect of genetic polymorphisms on mercury toxicity and (ii) to expand knowledge of the toxicity profile of alternative dental restorative materials. Furthermore, there is a need for the development of new alternative materials with a high degree of biocompatibility.