Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

À¯µ¿¼º ·¹Áø ¼öº¹¼ú¿¡¼­ Á¢ÂøÁ¦ ÁßÇÕ ¿©ºÎ¿¡ µû¸¥ ¹Ì¼¼´©Ãâ°ú Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸

THE EFFECTS OF PHOTOPOLYMERIZATION OF ADHESIVE ON SHEAR BOND STRENGTH AND MICROLEAKAGE OF FLOWABLE RESIN RESTORATION

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 2007³â 34±Ç 3È£ p.398 ~ 407
¹Ú¿ë±Ô, ±èÁ¾¼ö, À¯½ÂÈÆ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¹Ú¿ë±Ô ( Park Yong-Gyu ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
±èÁ¾¼ö ( Kim Jong-Soo ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
À¯½ÂÈÆ ( Yoo Seung-Hoon ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

º» ¿¬±¸´Â ¼Ò¾Æ ȯÀÚÀÇ À¯µ¿¼º º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø ¼öº¹ ½Ã Á¢ÂøÁ¦ÀÇ »ç¿ë ¹× ÁßÇÕ ¿©ºÎ ±×¸®°í Á¢ÂøÁ¦ Á¾·ù¿¡ µû¸¥ ¼öº¹¹° º¯¿¬ÀÇ ¹Ì¼¼´©Ãâ°ú Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ ºñ±³ÇÔÀ¸·Î½á Ä¡·á ½Ã°£ÀÇ ´ÜÃà °¡´É¼ºÀ» ŸÁøÇغ¸°íÀÚ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¹Ì¼¼´©ÃâÀ» Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇØ ¿ì½ÄÀÌ ¾ø°Å³ª ¹ý¶ûÁú¿¡ Á¦ÇÑµÈ ¿ì½ÄÀÌ ÀÖ´Â »ó, ÇÏ¾Ç ¼Ò±¸Ä¡ 84°³, Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ Æò°¡¸¦ À§ÇØ Çù¼³¸é¿¡ ¿ì½ÄÀ̳ª °á¼ÕºÎ°¡ ¾ø´Â ´ë±¸Ä¡ 70°³¸¦ °¢°¢ ÁغñÇÏ¿© »ç¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. Á¢Âø ½Ã½ºÅÛÀÇ Á¾·ù¿¡ µû¶ó ÃÑ 7±ºÀ» ¼³Á¤ÇÏ¿© I±º°ú II±ºÀº Single , III±º°ú IV±ºÀº AQ Bond , ¥´±º°ú ¥µ±ºÀº Prompt L- ±×¸®°í Á¢Âø ½Ã½ºÅÛÀ» »ç¿ëÇÏÁö ¾Ê°í ·¹ÁøÀ» ÃæÀüÇÏ´Â VII±ºÀ» ´ëÁ¶±ºÀ¸·Î ¼³Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¹Ì¼¼´©Ãâ°ú Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á°ú¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù. 1. ¹Ì¼¼´©Ãâ Æò°¡ °á°ú Single ¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÑ I±º°ú II±ºÀÌ ´Ù¸¥ ±º¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© ³·Àº ¿°·á ħÅõ¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³Â´Ù. I±º°ú II±º »çÀÌÀÇ ¿°·á ħÅõ ¾ç»óÀº À¯»çÇÏ°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. 2. Àü´Ü°áÇÕÃøÁ¤°á°ú I±º°ú II±ºÀÌ ´Ù¸¥ ±º¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© ³ôÀº ¼öÄ¡¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³ÂÀ¸¸ç Åë°èÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù(p<0.05). I±º°ú II±º »çÀÌ¿¡´Â À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù(p>0.05). 3. I±º°ú II±º, III±º°ú IV±º, V±º°ú VI±º »çÀÌ¿¡´Â Åë°èÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù(p>0.05). 4. VII±ºÀº I, II±º°ú V, VI±º¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© Åë°èÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ÀÖ°Ô ³·Àº Àü´Ü °áÇÕ °­µµ¸¦ º¸¿´À¸¸ç(p<0.05) III, IV±º°ú´Â º¸´Ù ³·Àº ¼öÄ¡¸¦ º¸¿´À¸³ª Åë°èÇÐÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷´Â ¾ø¾ú´Ù(p>0.05).

This study was performed to evaluate possibility to reduce treatment time for child patient who have limited control activity during flowable composite resin restoration according to comparing microleakage and shear bond strength. Group I, II with Single , group III, IV with AQ Bond , group V, VI with Prompt L-, and group VII as control group without adhesive system. 12 premolars and 10 molars were assigned into each group. Restorative material was used the Filtek flowable. The results were as follows; 1. The result of microleakage evaluation, in the group I, II with Single showed low dye penetration score. Dye penetration between group I and group II were similar. 2. Results for shear bond strength at group I and group II showed values higher than other groups. (p<0.05) There were no statistical differences between group I and group II. (p>0.05) 3. There was no statistical differences among I and II, III and IV, V and VI groups. 4. Group VII showed significantly low shear bond strength than group I, II, V, VI(p<0.05). Group VII showed low value than group with III and IV, but no statistical significances. In conclusion, adhesive bonding resin was not affect significantly to microleakage and shear bond strength of flowable resin restoration. Therefore, to reduce the operation time, adhesive bonding resin and flowable composite resin can be cured at once. But contamination of saliva, location of cavities can affect to bond strength in clinical field.

Å°¿öµå

Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ;¹Ì¼¼´©Ãâ;À¯µ¿¼º ·¹Áø
Shear bond strength;Microleakge;Flowable resin

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI