Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼öÁ¾ÀÇ ±Û¶ó½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ¼öº¹ÀçÀÇ ºÒ¼ÒÀ¯¸®·®°ú 2±Þ ¿Íµ¿ ¼öº¹½Ã ÀÎÁ¢Ä¡¾ÆÀÇ ¹ý¶ûÁú¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú¿¡ °üÇÑ ºñ±³ ¿¬±¸

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON THE AMOUNT OF FLOUORIDE RELEASE FROM THREE GLASS IONOMERS AND ANTICARIOGENIC EFFECT TO ENAMEL ON ADJACENT TOOTH AFTER CLASS II RESTORATION

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 1995³â 22±Ç 1È£ p.351 ~ 366
äÁ¾¼º, ÃÖ¿ëö,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
äÁ¾¼º (  ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³
ÃÖ¿ëö (  ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

°á·Ð
º» ½ÇÇèÀ» À§ÇÏ¿© ¼öº¹Àç·Î´Â Ketac-Silver, Miracle-Mix ±×¸®°í Dyract¸¦ ¼±Á¤ÇÏ¿´°í, ÀÌ
½ÇÇè Àç·á·ÎºÎÅÍÀÇ ºÒ¼Ò À¯¸®·®À» ÃøÁ¤Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© °¢ Àç·á¸¦ disc·Î ¸¸µé¾î 37µµ Ç׿±⿡
º¸°üÇϸ鼭 1ÀϺÎÅÍ 7ÀϱîÁö´Â ¸ÅÀÏ, ±×ÈÄ 14ÀÏ 21ÀÏ¿¡ °¢°¢ ºÒ¼Ò À¯¸®·®À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ´ë
»óÄ¡¾Æ¿Í ÀÏÁ¤°Å¸®¸¦ µÎ°í ¼öº¹Àç°¡ ÃæÀüµÈ plastic¿ë±â¸¦ ¸Å¸ôÇÏ¿©, ÀÎÁ¢Ä¡¾Æ¿¡ Èí¼öµÇ´Â
ºÒ¼Ò·®°ú ÀÎÁ¢ Ä¡¾Æ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ±× °á°ú ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ» ¾ò¾ú
´Ù.
1. °¢ Àç·á¿¡¼­ À¯¸®µÈ ºÒ¼Ò·®Àº 1ÀÏ¿¡¼­ °¡Àå ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç ½Ã°£ÀÌ Áö³²¿¡ µû¶ó °¨¼Ò
ÇÏ´Â ¾ç»óÀ» º¸¿´°í, Àü ½ÇÇè±â°£ µ¿¾È Miracle-Mix¿¡¼­ °¡Àå ³ôÀº ºÒ¼Ò À¯¸®·®À» º¸¿´´Ù.
2. I±º°ú II±º, II±º°ú III±ºÀº Àü ±â°£¿¡ °ÉÃÄ ºÒ¼Ò À¯¸®·®¿¡¼­ Åë°èÇÐÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷¸¦ º¸ÀÌ°í
ÀÖÀ¸¸ç(p<0.05), I±º°ú III±º »çÀÌ¿¡¼­´Â 1, 2, 3ÀÏÀ» Á¦¿ÜÇÏ°í Åë°èÇÐÀûÀÎ À¯ÀÇÂ÷¸¦ º¸¿´°í
(p<0.05), ºÒ¼Ò À¯¸®·®ÀÇ Á¤µµ´Â II±º, I±º, III±º ¼øÀ¸·Î ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
3. GI ¼öº¹¹°°ú ÀÎÁ¢ÇÑ Ä¡¾ÆÀÇ ¹ý¶ûÁú¿¡ Èí¼öµÈ ºÒ¼ÒÀÇ ¾çÀº ¸ðµç ±º¿¡¼­ Åë°èÇÐÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷
¸¦ º¸ÀÌ°í ÀÖÀ¸¸ç(p<0.05), III±ºº¸´Ù´Â I±ºÀÌ, I±ºº¸´Ù´Â II±º¿¡¼­ ¸¹Àº Èí¼ö·®À» º¸ÀÌ°í ÀÖ
´Ù(p<0.05).
4. °¢ ±º°£ º´¼Ò ±íÀÌÀÇ ºñ±³¿¡¼­´Â ¸ðµç ´ëÁ¶±ºº¸´Ù ½ÇÇ豺¿¡¼­ º´¼ÒÀÇ ±íÀÌ°¡ Åë°èÇÐÀû
À¸·Î À¯ÀǼºÀ» º¸ÀÌ¸ç °¨¼Ò¸¦ Çß°í(p<0.05), III±ºº¸´Ù´Â I±º¿¡¼­, I±ºº¸´Ù´Â II±º¿¡¼­ ¸¹Àº
º´¼Ò±íÀÌÀÇ °¨¼Ò¸¦ º¸ÀÌ°í ÀÖ´Ù(p<0.05).
#ÃÊ·Ï#
The purpose of this study were evaluated for fluoride release from various kinds of
glass ionomer filling materials to deionized distilled water and fluoride uptake by enamel
on adjacent tooth and anticariogenic effect after class II restoration with glass ionomer
materials.
Ketac-Silver, Miracle-Mix and Dyract were used for this study as a restorative
material.
Fluoride concentration released in solution from discs made of selected materials were
determined daily for the first 7 days and on the 14th, 21st day.
After embedding the plastic mold which filled with materials and teeth with acrylic
resin measurements of fluoride uptake by enamel on adjacent tooth and observation of
anticariogenic effect after class II restoration with glass ionomer materials.
The results can summarized as follow :
1. The highest amount of fluoride released in each group at first day, decreased
amount as time go. Miracle-Mix released more fluoride than all other materials tested.
2. Group I and II, Group II and III, Group I and Group III showed statistically
significant difference amount of fluoride released(p<0.05) except 1, 2, 3 day in Group I
and III.
3. Fluoried amount of uptaked by enamel adjacent glass ionomer materials showed
statistically significant difference each groups(p<0.05).
Group I more fluoried uptake than Group III, and Group II more fluoried uptake than
Group I.(p<0.05)
4. Comparison of lesion depth, all experimental group decreased lesion depth than
control group(ph0.05) and Group I more decreade than Group III, and Group II more
decreased than Group I.(p<0.05)

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI