Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

QLF(Quantitative light-induced fluorescence)¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ¼öº¹¹°ÀÇ ÀÎÁ¢¸é ¿ì½Ä À籤ȭ È¿°ú¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸

REMINERALIZATION EFFECT OF INTERPROXIMAL CARIES ADJACENT TO GLASS IONOMER RESTORATIONS: IN VITRO STUDY USING QLF

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 2011³â 38±Ç 3È£ p.244 ~ 249
ÀÌÇõ»ó, ÇöÈ«±Ù, Àå±âÅÃ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÌÇõ»ó ( Lee Hyeok-Sang ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇдëÇпø ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
ÇöÈ«±Ù ( Hyun Hong-Keun ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇдëÇпø ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
Àå±âÅà( Jang Ki-Taeg ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇдëÇпø ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ½Ã¸àÆ®´Â Ãʱ⠿ì½Ä Ä¡Áú¿¡ À籤ȭ È¿°ú°¡ ÀÖ´Ù°í ¾Ë·ÁÁ® ÀÖ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â ½ÃÆǵǰí ÀÖ´Â ¼¼ °¡Áö Á¾·ùÀÇ ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ½Ã¸àÆ®(Fuji IX , , )¸¦ ½ÇÇ豺À¸·Î, º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø(Filtek )À» ´ëÁ¶±ºÀ¸·Î »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© 3°³¿ù°£ ÀÎÁ¢¸é ¿ì½ÄÁõ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ À籤ȭ È¿°ú¸¦ ½ÃÆíÀÇ Æı« ¾øÀÌ 1°³¿ù °£°ÝÀ¸·Î QLF·Î ½ÃÆíÀÇ »óÀ» ¾ò°í, ÀÌ·¸°Ô ¾òÀº »óÀÇ ¹«±âÁú ¼Ò½Ç·®()À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© ÀÇ º¯È­·®À» °è»êÇÏ¿© ½ÃÆíÀÇ À籤ȭ Á¤µµ¸¦ Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÎÁ¢¸é ¼öº¹¹°Àº Àΰø ¿ì½Ä º´¼Ò°¡ ÀÖ´Â Ä¡¾Æ ½ÃÆí°ú ¼öº¹Àç·á(¼¼ °¡Áö ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ¹× º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø)¸¦ Á¢Ã˽ÃÄÑ ÀçÇöÇÏ¿´°í, ÀÌ°ÍÀ» Àΰø Ÿ¾×¿¡ ¿ÏÀüÈ÷ Àá±âµµ·Ï ÇÏ¿© pH 7.0, ¸¦ À¯ÁöÇÏ¿´´Ù. Ä¡¾Æ ½ÃÆíµéÀº ½ÇÇè ½ÃÀÛ ÈÄ 30, 60, 90ÀÏ µÚ¿¡ ²¨³»¾î QLF·Î ÃÔ¿µÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¾ò¾îÁø ¿µ»óÀ» QLF¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ½ÃÆí °¢°¢ÀÇ ¹«±âÁú ¼Ò½Ç·®()À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´°í, ÀÇ º¯È­·®(), Áï ¹«±âÁú ¼Ò½Ç º¯È­·®À» °è»êÇÏ¿© ¾ò¾îÁø °ªÀ» ANOVA·Î ºÐ¼®ÇÏ°í, Dunnett C multiple comparison test·Î »çÈÄ °ËÁ¤À» ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á°ú¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù. 1. ¸ðµç ±º¿¡¼­ º´¼ÒÀÇ ¹«±âÁú ¼Ò½Ç·®()ÀÌ Áõ°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. 2. ¹«±âÁú ¼Ò½Ç·®()ÀÇ º¯È­·®ÀÎ ¹«±â½Ç ¼Ò½Ç º¯È­·®()Àº, 1 °³¿ù ÈÄ¿¡´Â ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ½Ã¸àÆ®°¡ º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø¿¡ ºñÇØ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ÄÇÀ¸¸ç(p<0.05), ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó Áß¿¡¼­´Â Fuji IX °¡ , ¿¡ ºñÇØ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ÄÇ´Ù(p<0.05). 2 °³¿ù ÈÄ¿¡´Â Fuji IX °¡ ³ª¸ÓÁö ±º¿¡ ºñÇØ °¡ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ÄÇÀ¸¸ç(p<0.05), 3 °³¿ù ÈÄ¿¡´Â ¸ðµç ±º°£¿¡ ÀÇ À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù. 3. ¼¼ °¡Áö ±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ½Ã¸àÆ®¿¡¼­ ¹«±â½Ç ¼Ò½Ç º¯È­·®(), Áï À籤ȭ Á¤µµ´Â ½Ã°£ÀÌ Áö³¯¼ö·Ï Á¡Â÷ °¨¼ÒÇÏ¿´´Ù. 4. ´ëÁ¶±ºÀÎ º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø ±º¿¡¼­µµ ¹«±â½Ç ¼Ò½Ç º¯È­·®()Àº Áõ°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

This in vitro study compared the remineralization of incipient interproximal caries in the presence of three glass ionomer cements(highly-filled glass ionomer cement, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, compomer) and a resin composite(control). Thirty-two extracted premolars were selected based upon the lack of any visible demineralization. The teeth were coated in a transparent acid resistant nail varnish leaving mm square. The teeth were subjected to the demineralizing buffer for 3 days and quantitative light-induced fluorescence(QLF) images of the subjects were taken. Proximal restoration was simulated by placing tooth specimens and the various glass ionomer cements in closed containers with artificial saliva at and pH 7.0 with constant circulation. Further QLF images were subsequently taken at 30, 60, and 90 days. The changes of mineral loss() were evaluated by QLF and the change of () were compared between groups in order to evaluate the effects of remineralization. All data were analyzed using ANOVA and the post-HOC Dunnett C multiple comparison test at p<0.05. While (changes of mineral loss) increased for all treatments, the increases for three glass ionomer groups were significantly higher than that for the resin group at first month period. As time went on, the amount of decreased.

Å°¿öµå

±Û¶ó½º ¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ½Ã¸àÆ®; À籤ȭ; ÀÎÁ¢¸é ¿ì½ÄÁõ
Glass ionomer cement; Remineralization; Proximal caries; Quantitative light-induced fluorescence(QLF)

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI