imens exhibited wear resistance similar to Splint Biocrylpolymethyl methacrylate specimens.

REFERENCES1. Solberg WK, Clark GT, Rugh JD. Nocturnal electromyographic evaluation

of bruxism patients undergoing short term splint therapy. J Oral Rehabil1975;2:215-23.

2. Okeson JP, editor. Management of temporomandibular disorders andocclusion. 5th ed. St Louis: Elsevier Science; 2002. p. 473.

3. Sheikholeslam A, Holmgren K, Riise C. Therapeutic effects of the planeocclusal splint on signs and symptoms of craniomandibular disorders inpatients with nocturnal bruxism. J Oral Rehabil 1993;20:473-82.

4. al-Hiyasat AS, Saunders WP, Sharkey SW, Smith GM, Gilmour WH.Investigation of human enamel wear against four dental ceramics andgold. J Dent 1998;26:487-495.

5. Kohn DH. Mechanical properties. In: Craig RG, Powers JM, editors. Re-storative dental materials. 11th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2001. p. 109.

6. Soderholm KJ, Richards ND. Wear resistance of composites: a solvedproblem? Gen Dent 1998;46:256-63.

7. Rawls HR, Esquivel-Upshaw JF. Restorative resins. In: Anusavice KJ, edi-tor. Phillips’ science of dental materials. 11th ed. St Louis: Elsevier Sci-ence; 2003. p. 399-442.

8. Hu X, Marquis PM, Shortall AC. Two-body in vitro wear study of somecurrent dental composites and amalgams. J Prosthet Dent 1999;82:214-20.

9. Shabanian M, Richards LC. In vitro wear rates of materials under differentloads and varying pH. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:650-6.

10. Marquis PM, Hu X, Shortall AC. Two-body wear of dental compositesunder different loads. Int J Pros 2000;13:473-9.

11. Jorgensen KD, Horsted P, Janum O, Krogh J, Schulz J. Abrasion of class Irestorative resins. Scand J Dent Res 1979;87:140-5.

12. Knobloch LA, Kerby RE, Seghi R, van Putten M. Two-body wear resistanceand degree of conversion of laboratory-processed composite materials. IntJ Prosthodont 1999;12:432-8.

13. Leinfelder KF, Wilder AD Jr, Teixeira LC. Wear rates of posterior compos-ite resins. J Am Dent Assoc 1986;112:829-33.

14. Powers JM, Ryan MD, Hosking DJ, Goldberg AJ. Comparison of in vitroand in vivo wear of composites. J Dent Res 1983;62:1089-91.

15. Lutz F, Phillips RW, Roulet JF, Setcos JC. In vivo and in vitro wear ofpotential posterior composites. J Dent Res 1984;63:914-20.

16. Wassell RW, McCabe JF, Walls AW. A two-body frictional wear test. JDent Res 1994;73:1546-53.

17. Callister WD Jr. Materials science and engineering. 6th ed. New York:John Wiley & Sons; 2002. p. 162-8.

18. O’Brien WJ. Dental materials and their selection. 3rd ed. Carol Stream (IL):Quintessence Publishing; 2002. p. 343.

19. Wassell RW, McCabe JF, Walls AW. Wear characteristics in a two-bodywear test. Dent Mater 1994;10:269-74.

20. Leinfelder KF, Suzuki S. In vitro wear device for determining posteriorcomposite wear. J Am Dent Assoc 1999;130:1347-53.

21. Bates JF, Stafford GD, Harrison A. Masticatory function-a review of theliterature. III. Masticatory performance and efficiency. J Oral Rehabil1976;3:57-67.

22. Gibbs CH, Mahan PE, Lundeen HC, Brehnan K, Walsh EK, Holbrook WB.Occlusal forces during chewing and swallowing as measured by soundtransmission. J Prosthet Dent 1981;46:443-9.

23. Clark GT, Beemsterboer PL, Jacobsen R. The effect of sustained submaxi-mal clenching on maximum bite force in myofascial pain dysfunctionpatients. J Oral Rehabil 1984;11:387-91.

Reprint requests to:DR WILLIAM J. DUNN

DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH

59 DS/MRDGB1615 TRUEMPER ST

LACKLAND AFB, TX 78236-5551FAX: 210-292-2740E-MAIL: william.dunn@lackland.af.mil

0022-3913/2003/$30.00 � 0

doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00545-6

Noteworthy Abstractsof theCurrent Literature

Maxillary bone growth and implant positioning in a youngpatient: A case reportEnzo Rossi, Jens O. Andreasen. Int J Periodontics RestorativeDent 2003;23:113-9.

The literature supports the efficacy of osseointegrated implants for partially edentulous patients, butcare must be exercised in adolescents with incomplete bone formation. Implants do not follow thenormal growth of the jaws, and they behave like ankylosed teeth. They may also interfere with thenormal growth of the alveolar process and jeopardize the germs of the adjacent permanent teeth oralter eruption. This case report analyzes the unfavorable clinical and radiographic findings of asingle-tooth replacement in a young male over a 15-year period.—Reprinted with permission ofQuintessence Publishing

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY CASEY, DUNN, AND WRIGHT

502 VOLUME 90 NUMBER 5