Purpose: Neuroblastoma (NB) is childhood’s most common extracranial solid malignancy. We have compared two imaging modalities, 131I-MIBG and 18F-DOPA PET/CT, to evaluate NB. Also, feasibility of the application of standardised scoring systems, SIOPEN and Curie scoring systems, in 18F-DOPA PET/CT was explored. Methods: Patients with histopathology-proven NB underwent 131I-MIBG (planar and SPECT/CT) and 18F-DOPA PET/CT scans, as per standard imaging protocols. Duration between scans ranged from 1 to 30 days (median = 8 days). Number of lesions in Curie and SIOPEN scoring systems applied on both modalities was compared. Results: Forty-six patients were included (M:F = 29:17) with a median age of 36 months. Both 131I-MIBG and 18F-DOPA scans were positive in 39 patients and negative in four patients. 18F-DOPA PET/CT was positive in additional three patients, in which 131I-MIBG was negative (p = 0.25). Overall, 18F-DOPA identified significantly greater number of lesions than 131I-MIBG, especially metastatic skeletal lesions (p < 0.05). Significant difference was observed between Curie scores in the two modalities, unlike SIOPEN scores. However, when the cut-off age of 18 months was taken, no significant difference was seen in either of the scoring systems in both the scans (p > 0.05). CS and SIOPEN scores were significantly higher in bone marrow-positive patients. Conclusion 18F-DOPA PET/CT detected more lesions than 131I-MIBG but had little impact on staging of the disease. For evaluation of NB, both scans can be used interchangeably as per the availability. Furthermore, both SIOPEN and Curie scoring systems, standardised for MIBG, can also be used to semi-quantify disease extent in 18F-DOPA PET/CT.

Lidocaine is the most commonly used local anesthetic (LA) agent in various dental as well as oral and maxillofacial procedures. Although rare, adverse effects and allergic reactions to lidocaine have been reported. In patients with suspected allergy to LA or a history of such reaction, careful history-taking and allergy testing should be performed to choose an alternative LA agent to avoid any adverse effects. Here, we present two cases of delayed hypersensitivity reaction to lidocaine, wherein the patients presented with erythema, edema, and itching. Intradermal testing confirmed allergic reaction to lidocaine, and the patients underwent successful dental treatment using an alternative LA agent. This report highlights the importance of allergy testing prior to LA use considering the serious consequences of allergy to these agents and describes the management of such patients using an alternative LA agent.