Athanasios Stamoulis
Introduction
Athanasios Stamoulis is a UK dentist who has been under suspension since 2020 and remains there: at review hearings on 29 April 2026, a GDC Professional Conduct Committee extended one of the two concurrent suspension orders on his registration by a further six months, finding his fitness to practise still impaired by misconduct in two separate clinical cases — one covering substandard care of two patients in 2017-18, the other covering a patient treated in April 2022. The committee received no evidence of insight, reflection or remediation in either case .
Background Information
The first case is old and fully litigated: an October 2020 hearing found proved allegations about the standard of care and treatment of two patients between April 2017 and November 2018 — radiographic failings and the resultant failures in treatment planning and informed consent, and record-keeping failings in Patient A’s case, and the omission of intra-operative radiographs or an electronic apex locator in Patient B’s case. That case is CAS-193787, one of two concurrent suspension orders on his registration .
The second case is newer: a June 2024 hearing found proved allegations about the standard of care and treatment of a patient in April 2022 — failure to provide all treatment options, failure to discuss the risks and benefits, failure to treat the patient’s UL8 and LL7 teeth, and failure to take bitewing radiographs as clinically indicated. The failings were found to amount to misconduct .
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Adjudicated (regulatory). The findings are a GDC committee’s conclusions on the civil standard of proof in two fitness-to-practise hearings. No criminal charge was involved.
At the April 2026 review of the first case, the committee determined that impairment persisted on both public protection and public interest grounds. It had received no further documentation from Stamoulis since the July 2025 review, and no evidence of insight, reflection or remediation. It noted he had previously breached conditions in this case and was not meaningfully engaging with the GDC, found conditions of practice neither appropriate nor workable, and extended the suspension by six months with a review before expiry .
The same day, the committee reviewed the second case and reached the same destination by the same road: no documentation since the July 2025 review, no evidence of insight or full reflection, nothing — no personal development plan, no CPD — to show the clinical concerns had been remedied. Conditions were ruled out as unworkable, and that suspension too was extended by six months with a review before expiry .
Public Reaction and Consequences
The consequence is continued exclusion from practice: two concurrent suspension orders, both extended on 29 April 2026, running since the original sanction — six years on the first case. The cases are recorded in MedicWatch’s listing of dental professionals suspended in 2026 .
What the reviews add is the engagement record: through two hearings in 2025 and two more in 2026, the committee’s file on him grew by nothing — no submissions, no retraining, no reflective piece. In regulatory terms the clinical findings froze in 2020 and 2024, and everything since has been silence .
Current Status
Stamoulis is a suspended dentist under two concurrent six-month orders imposed on 29 April 2026, each with a review directed before expiry. The underlying findings — the 2017-18 care of two patients and the April 2022 care of a third — are unchallenged on the record, and the committees found no workable alternative to further suspension in either case .
The trajectory is the risk: successive committees have extended, and each extension has been met with the same non-engagement that prompted the last. The next reviews will decide whether the pattern continues or the case moves toward erasure, which is the outcome a regulator reaches when suspension stops producing engagement .
Impact on Their Career/Life
Two misconduct cases eight years apart, one common thread: treatment decisions — radiographs, options, consent — that put clinical judgment ahead of what the records could support. The first case cost him his registration in 2020; the second proved the concerns were not historical, arriving while he was already under order. Six years of suspension without a single piece of remediation evidence means the register now holds a dentist whose last documented engagement with his own regulators was a breached conditions order. The next review is another chance to change that, and on this record it is also another step toward erasure .