Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

±¤ÁßÇÕ Glass Ionomer Cement¿Í AmalgamÀÇ °áÇÕ°­µµ¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸

A Study On The Bond Strengths Of Light-Curing Glass Ionomer Cements To Dental Amalgam

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 1996³â 23±Ç 2È£ p.357 ~ 364
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Á¤Å¼º/Jeong Tae Sung

Abstract

¿ä¾à
¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°ú ÀÓ»ó¿¡¼­ ÀÚÁÖ »ç¿ëµÇ´Â 3 Á¾ÀÇ ±¤ÁßÇÕÇü GICÀÇ ¾Æ¸»°¨¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Á¢Âø´ÉÀ» Æò°¡
ÇÒ ¸ñÀûÀ¸·Î 60 °³ÀÇ ¾Æ¸»°¨ ºÎÂø½ÃÆíÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© Áß°£°áÇÕÁ¦ÀÎ ScotchbondÀÇ »ç¿ë¿©ºÎ¿¡
µû¸¥ °æÈ­µÈ ¾Æ¸»°¨¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±¤ÁßÇÕ GICÀÇ Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ°í °æ°èºÎÀÇ ÆÄÀý¾ç»óÀ»
°üÂûÇÑ °á°ú, ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ» ¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1. ¾Æ¸»°¨¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±¤ÁßÇÕÇü GICÀÇ Àü´Ü°­µµ´Â Fuji ¥± LC, Vitremer, VitrebondÀÇ ¼øÀ¸·Î
³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù (p<0.05).
2. Áß°£°áÇÕÁ¦ÀÎ Scotchbond¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº °æ¿ì¿¡¼­ Scotchbond¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÑ °æ¿ì¿¡ ºñÇØ
ÀüÆÇ°áÇÕ°­µµ°¡ ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù(p<0.05).
3. °áÇÕÆÄÀý¸éÀº Scotchbond¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÑ °æ¿ìÀÇ ´ëºÎºÐ¿¡¼­ Scotchbond¿Í ¾Æ¸»°¨ÀÇ °æ°èºÎ¿¡
¼­ ½ÃÆíÀÇ Å»¶ôÀÌ ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ¾Æ¸»°¨°ú ±¤ÁßÇÕ GICÀÇ °áÇÕÀ» ½ÃµµÇÒ °æ¿ì¿¡´Â Scotchbond´Â
»ç¿ëÇÏÁö ¾Ê´Â °ÍÀÌ ¹Ù¶÷Á÷ÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÇ¾ú´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
The purpose of this study was to asses the shear bond strengths of 3 types of light
curing Glass Ionomer cement to dental amalgam with or without an intermediary agent
60 amalgam adherent specimens were prepared and aged in water at 37¡É for 3 day:
Before bonding, the amalgam surfaces were finished flat on 600-grit silicon carbide
grape: 30 specimens among 60 were used for bonding in this condition, and tile other 30
wert covered with a thin layer of light-curing intermediary agent. Shear bond strengths
were measured with universal testing machine (Instron, Model 4301) and statistically
processed by ANOVA and t-test. On completion of bond test, the fracture surfaces were
examined under light microscope so that the mode of bond failure could be assessed
The results were as follows :
1. Bond strength of Fuji ¥± LC group showed the hightest value and was followed by
Vitremer, Vitrebond groups (p<0.05).
2. The bond strengths achieved without an intermediary agent were higher than those
obtained with intermediary agent (p<0.05).
3. For the specimens bonded with intermediary agent, bond failures occurred mostly 5
the agent-amalgam interface. So, the use of intermediary bonding agent was though not
recommendable at glass ionomer-amalgam interface.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI