Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Ä¡°ú¿ë Á¢ÂøÁ¦¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÑ Á¢Âø ¾Æ¸»°¨ÀÇ °áÇÕ °­µµ

BOND STRENGTH OF BONDED AMALGAM USING DENTAL ADHESIVES

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 1999³â 26±Ç 2È£ p.284 ~ 295
±èµ¿ÈÆ, ±èÁ¤¿í, ÇѼ¼Çö,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
±èµ¿ÈÆ (  ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
±èÁ¤¿í (  ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
ÇѼ¼Çö (  ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

¾Æ¸»°¨ÀÇ ´ÜÁ¡ÀÎ °ÇÀü Ä¡Áú »èÁ¦¿Í ¹Ì¼¼ ´©ÃâÀ» ÁÙÀ̱â À§ÇÑ Á¢Âø ¾Æ¸»°¨(bonded amalgam)¿¡ »ç¿ëµÇ´Â Ä¡°ú¿ë Á¢ÂøÁ¦ÀÇ Á¢Âø °­µµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ°í ÆÄÀý¸éÀ» °üÂûÇÏ¿© ÄÞÆ÷ÁöÆ® ·¹Áø°ú ºñ±³ Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
¹ß°ÅÇÑ ¿ìÀüÄ¡ÀÇ ¼ø¸éÀ» Á÷°æ 8mmÀÇ ¿øÇüÀ¸·Î õ°øÇÏ¿© ¾òÀº ºÎºÐÀ» ¼ø¸éÀÌ ¹Ù±ùÂÊÀ¸·Î ÇâÇϵµ·Ï ¾ÆÅ©¸±¸¯ ·¹Áø ºí·Ï¿¡ ¸Å¸ôÇÏ¿© »ó¾ÆÁú°ú ¹ý¶ûÁú±ºÀ» °¢°¢ 55°³¾¿ ÁغñÇÏ¿´´Ù. 1±º:Superbond C&B, 2±º:Panavia 21, 3±º:All-Bond 2, 4±º:Fuji I Glass lonomer Luting Cement, 5±º:Scotchbond Multi-Purpose(Restorative Z-100)ÀÇ 5°³ ±ºÀ¸·Î ³ª´©¾î Áö¸§ 6.3mm, ±íÀÌ 1.5mmÀÇ ±¸¸ÛÀÌ ¶Õ¸° ÃæÀü¿ë Ʋ(mold)À» À§Ä¡½Ã±«°í Ç¥¸éÀ» Á¢ÂøÁ¦·Î ó¸®ÇÑ ÈÄ ¾Æ¸»°¨ ÃæÀüÀ» ÇÏ¿´´Ù. 5±ºÀº ·¹Áø ÃæÀü ÈÄ 40ÃÊ°£ ±¤ÁßÇÕÇÏ¿´´Ù.
°¢ ½ÃÆíÀº ¾Æ¸»°¨ ÃæÀü 24½Ã°£ ÈÄ Á¢Âø °­µµ ÃøÁ¤¿ë ±â±¸¿¡ ÀåÂøÇÏ°í ¸¸´É ½ÃÇè±â¿¡¼­ 0.2mm/minÀÇ cross-head ¼Óµµ·Î ÇÏÁßÀ» °¡ÇÏ¿© ½ÃÆíÀÌ Å»¶ôÇÒ ¶§±îÁöÀÇ ÇÏÁß°ª(§¸)À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ°í, ÆÄÀý¸éÀ» °Ë»çÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ» ¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1. »ó¾ÆÁú±º¿¡¼­ 1, 2, 4±ºÀº 5±º¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© Åë°èÇÐÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀǼº ÀÖ°Ô ³·Àº Á¢Âø °­µµ¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù(P<0.05).
2. ¹ý¶ûÁú±º¿¡¼­ 4±ºÀº 5±º¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© Åë°èÇÐÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀǼº ÀÖ°Ô ³·Àº Á¢Âø °­µµ¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù(P<0.05).
3. 2±º¿¡¼­´Â »ó¾ÆÁú±º¿¡¼­ ¹ý¶ûÁú±º¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© Åë°èÇÐÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀǼº ÀÖ°Ô ³·Àº Á¢Âø °­µµ¸¦ º¸¿´À¸³ª(P<0.05), ´Ù¸¥ Á¢ÂøÁ¦¿¡¼­´Â »ó¾ÆÁú±º°ú ¹ý¶ûÁú±º¿¡¼­ÀÇ Á¢Âø °­µµ°¡ À¯ÀǼº ÀÖ´Â Â÷À̸¦ º¸ÀÌÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù(P>0.05).
4. Cohesive failure´Â 1E±º°ú 5D±º¿¡¼­ °üÂûµÇ¾ú°í, mixed failure´Â 1,5±º¿¡¼­ °üÂûµÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, 2,3,4±º¿¡¼­´Â adhesive failure¸¸ °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù.

The purpose of this study was to measure and analyze the bond strength of bonded amalgam using dental adhesives and to compare this with light-curing composite resin.
Sections 8mm in diameter were punched out from the labial surface of bovine anterior teeth. These were embedded in clear acrylic resin blocks with labial surface facing out. 55 specimens were made for enamel andd dentin each. After dividing these into 5 groups, group 1: Superbond C&B, group 2: Panavia 21, group 3: All-Bond 2, group 4: Fuji I Glass Ionomer Luting Cement, group 5: Scotchbond Multi Purpose(Restorative Z-100), molds with holes of 6.3mm in diameter and 1.5mm in depth were placed over the specimens. The exposed tooth surfaces were treated with adhesives and the molds were filled with amalgam. In group 5, the mold was filled with composite resin and light-cured for 40 seconds.
The author measured all specimens for bond strength 24 hours after amalgam filling and an¡©alyzed fracture surfaces. The following results were obtained: 1. Among the dentin groups, groups 1, 2 and 4 showed significantly lower bond strength compared
with group 5(N0.05).
2. Among the enamel groups, group 4 showed significantly lower bond strength compared with group 5(P<0.05).
3. In group 2, 21) showed significantly lower bond strength compared with group 2E(P(0.05). Other adhesives showed no such differences in bond strength between dentin and enamel(P)0.05).
4. Cohesive failure was observed in groups lE and 5D, while mixed failure was seen in groups 1 and 5. Only adhesive failures were noted in groups 2, 3, 4.

Å°¿öµå

Á¢Âø °­µµ;Á¢Âø ¾Æ¸»°¨;bonded amalgam;ÆÄÀý ¾ç»ó;Bond strength;failure mode

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI