Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

°¡½Ã ±¤¼±°ú ¾Æ¸£°ï ·¹ÀÌÀú¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ÁßÇÕµÈ ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¿Í ·¹Áø ¼öº¹¹° ÁÖº¯ ¹ý¶ûÁúÀÇ Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú¿¡ °üÇÑ ºñ±³ ¿¬±¸

A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON THE ANTICARIOGENECITY OF ENAMEL SURFACE ADJACENT TO CLASS IONOMER AND RESIN RESTORATION POLVMERIZED BY VIBLE LIGHT AND ARGON LASER

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 1998³â 25±Ç 1È£ p.62 ~ 75
À¯º´±Ô, ÀÌÁ¾Çå, ÀÌÁ¾Çö,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À¯º´±Ô (  ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇÐ
ÀÌÁ¾Çå (  ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇÐ
ÀÌÁ¾Çö (  ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇÐ

Abstract

°á ·Ð
º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â ¾Æ¸£°ï ·¹ÀÌÀúÀÇ Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú¸¦ Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇØ ±âÁ¸ÀÇ °¡½Ã ±¤¼±À» ´ëÁ¶±º
À¸·ÎÇÏ¿© ¿ì½Ä º´¼Ò ±íÀ̸¦ Æí±¤ Çö¹Ì°æ °üÂûÀ» ÅëÇÏ¿© ºñ±³ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ»
¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1. ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó-°¡½Ã±¤¼± ÁßÇÕ±º(¥±)ÀÌ ·¹Áø-·¹ÀÌÀú ±º(¥²)º¸´Ù À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ³·Àº º´¼Ò
±íÀ̸¦ º¸ÀÎ °ÍÀº ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó Àç·áÀÚüÀÇ ºÒ¼Ò À¯¸®¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú ¶§¹®ÀÎ °Í
À¸·Î ÃßÁ¤µÈ´Ù(p<0.05).
2. ¿ì½ÄÀÇ Ãʱ⠴ܰ迡¼­´Â ¥°±º°ú ¥² ¥³±º, ¥±±º°ú ¥² ¥³±º°£¿¡¼­¸¸ À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸³ª
¿ì½Ä ÁøÇà ÈÄ¿¡´Â ¸ðµç ±º°£¿¡¼­ À¯ÀÇÂ÷¸¦ º¸À̱⠽ÃÀÛÇÏ¿´À¸¹Ç·Î, ¾Æ¸£°ï ·¹ÀÌÀú Á¶»ç ¿¡
ÀÇÇÑ Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú°¡ º´¼Ò ¹ß»ýÀÇ Ãʱâ´Ü°è º¸´Ù´Â ÁøÇà ´Ü°è¿¡ ´õ¿í ¿µÇâÀ» ÁÖ´Â °Í À¸·Î
ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù (p<0.05).
3. ¿ì½Ä ÁøÇà¿¡ µû¸¥ º´¼Ò ±íÀÌÀÇ Áõ°¡À²ÀÌ ¥°, ¥±, ¥²±º¿¡ ºñÇØ ¥³ ±º¿¡¼­ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ³ô¾Ò
´ø °á°ú´Â ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó Àç·á¿Í ·¹ÀÌÀú Á¶»çÀÇ Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú¿¡ ±âÀÎÇÑ °ÍÀ¸·Î Æò°¡µÈ´Ù
(p<0.05)
ÀÌ»ó°ú °°ÀÌ ¾Æ¸£°ï ·¹ÀÌÀú¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ÁßÇÕÀÌ ¶Ñ·ÇÇÑ Ç׿ì½Ä È¿°ú¸¦ ³ªÅ¸
³»´Â ¿Ü¿¡µµ ÁßÇÕ ½Ã°£À» Å©°Ô ´ÜÃà½Ãų ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ÀåÁ¡ÀÌ ÀÖÀ¸¹Ç·Î ¿ì½Ä È°¼ºµµ°¡ ³ô°í Çൿ
Á¶Àý¿¡ ¾î·Á¿òÀ» Æì´Â ¼Ò¾Æ ȯÀÚ¿¡°Ô ƯÈ÷ È¿°úÀûÀÏ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÇ¾ú´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
The main purpose of this study was to compare the anticariogenecity of glass
ionomer restorative material polymerized by argon laser versus visible light.
The results from the present study can be summarized as follows :
1. Under the polarized light microscope, the specimens of laser-cured group showed
the seal-lower lesion body than that of visible-light cured group, both in the stage of
lesion initiation and progression.
2. Glass ionomer material cured by visible light showed shallower body of lesion than
that of composite resin cured by argon laser at the stage of lesion progression (p<0.05).
It was suggested fluoride released from the glass ionomer might have the additive
anticariogenic effect.
3. Statistical difference between groups on depth of lesion body was evident after
lesion progression (p<0.05) It was suggested that anticariogenic effect by argon laser
was more effective at the stage of lesion progression than the lesion initiation.
4. The increment of lesion body during progression was highest in group ¥³ (p<0.05).
5. Based upon the above-mentioned results of this study, it can be concluded that the
advantage of anticariogenic effect and short curing time of argon laser in glass ionomer
poly-merization should be considered in children and adolescents whose caries activity is
relatively higher.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI