Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

·¹Áø°­È­Çü ±Û¶ó½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸ÓÀÇ Ãʱ⠰áÇշ°ú Ÿ¾×¿À¿° Á¦°ÅÀÇ »ó°ü°ü°è

Effect of Saliva Contamination Stage and Different Decontamination Procedures on Bonding Strength of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 2019³â 46±Ç 2È£ p.158 ~ 164
°íÇÑÈ£, ¹ÚÈ£¿ø, ÀÌÁÖÇö, ¼­Çö¿ì,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
°íÇÑÈ£ ( Go Han-Ho ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
¹ÚÈ£¿ø ( Park Ho-Won ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
ÀÌÁÖÇö ( Lee Ju-Hyun ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç
¼­Çö¿ì ( Seo Hyun-Woo ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾ÆÄ¡°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

ÀÌ ¿¬±¸´Â Ÿ¾×¿À¿°ÀÌ ¹ß»ýÇÑ ½Ã±â¿Í Ÿ¾×¿À¿° Á¦°Å ¹æ¹ýÀÌ ·¹Áø°­È­Çü ±Û¶ó½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸ÓÀÇ »ó¾ÆÁú¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °áÇշ¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ¿¡ ´ëÇØ Æò°¡ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
°¢ ±º´ç 10°³¾¿ ÃÑ 60°³ÀÇ ¹ß°ÅµÈ ¿µ±¸Ä¡ »ó¾ÆÁú Ç¥¸éÀ» ³ëÃâ½ÃÄÑ ¾ÆÅ©¸± ·¹Áø¿¡ ¸Å¸ôÇÏ¿´´Ù. I±ºÀº ´ëÁ¶±ºÀ¸·Î Æú¸®¾ÆÅ©¸±»ê(PAA) À¸·Î »ê󸮸¸ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù. II, III±ºÀº PAA »êó¸® Àü Ÿ¾×¿À¿°À» ½ÃÄ×°í IV, V, VI±ºÀº PAA »êó¸® ÈÄ Å¸¾×¿À¿°À» ½ÃÄ×´Ù. Ÿ¾×¿À¿° ÈÄ II ±º°ú IV±ºÀº °ÇÁ¶ÇÏ¿´°í III±º°ú V±ºÀº ¼ö¼¼ ÈÄ °ÇÁ¶ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç VI±ºÀº Ãß°¡ÀûÀ¸·Î PAA »êó¸®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±× ÈÄ ·¹Áø°­È­Çü ±Û¶ó½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¸¦ ÃæÀüÇÏ¿´´Ù. Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ´Â ¸¸´É Àç·á ½ÃÇè±â·Î ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´°í ÆÄÀý ¾ç»óÀº ÁÖ»çÀü»çÇö¹Ì°æÀ¸·Î °üÂûÇÏ¿´´Ù.
´ëÁ¶±ºÀÎ I±ºÀÌ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô °¡Àå ³ôÀº Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù(p = 0.001). Ÿ¾×¿À¿°À» ½ÃÇàÇÑ ±ºµé Áß¿¡¼­´Â VI±ºÀÌ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ³ôÀº Àü´Ü°­µµ¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù(p = 0.001). ÆÄÀý¾ç»óÀº ±º°£¿¡ À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷À̸¦ º¸ÀÌÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù(p = 0.729).
Ÿ¾×¿À¿°Àº ¹ß»ýÇÑ ½Ã±â¿Í »ó°ü¾øÀÌ ·¹Áø°­È­Çü ±Û¶ó½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸ÓÀÇ »ó¾ÆÁú¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °áÇÕ·ÂÀ» À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ÀúÇϽÃÄ×´Ù(p = 0.001). ¼ö¼¼¿Í °ÇÁ¶¸¸À¸·Î´Â Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ ȸº¹ÇÏÁö ¸øÇß´Ù. PAA »êó¸® ÈÄ Å¸¾×¿À¿°ÀÌ ¹ß»ýÇÑ °æ¿ì Ãß°¡ÀûÀÎ PAA »ê󸮰¡ Àü´Ü°áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô Çâ»ó½ÃÄ×´Ù(p = 0.001).

The purpose of this study was to compare the bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) to dentin with saliva contamination at different stages and using different decontamination procedures.
Extracted human permanent molars were embedded onto acrylic resin with the dentin surface exposed. Group I was a control group that was conditioned with polyacrylic acid (PAA). Groups II and III were contaminated with saliva before PAA conditioning and Groups IV, V, and VI were contaminated with saliva after PAA conditioning. After saliva contamination, Groups II and IV were dried, Groups III and V were rinsed and dried, and Group VI was additionally conditioned with PAA. After surface treatment, the dentin specimens were filled with RMGI.
Group I showed significantly higher bond strength than the other groups. Group VI showed a significantly higher bond strength than the other saliva contaminated groups. However, there were no significant differences in the failure mode between the different groups.
Saliva contamination impaired the bond strength of RMGI to dentin, regardless of when the saliva contamination occurred. Decontamination with washing and drying could not improve the shear bond strength of RMGIC. When saliva contamination occurred after PAA conditioning, additional PAA conditioning improved the shear bond strength.

Å°¿öµå

Saliva contamination; Resin-modified glass ionomer; Decontamination; Bond strength

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

   

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI