Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

±âÀúÀç¿ë ±¤ÁßÇÕÇü ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸ÓÀÇ Ä¡Áú ¹× º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø Àη¹ÀÌ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Á¢Âø¾ç»ó

STUDY ON THE INTERFACE BETWEEN LIGHT-CURED GLASS IONOMER BASE AND INDIRECT COMPOSITE RESIN INLAY AND DENTIN

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Á¸ÇÐȸÁö 2005³â 30±Ç 3È£ p.158 ~ 169
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À̼ÛÈñ/Lee SH ±èµ¿ÁØ/ȲÀ±Âù/¿À¿ø¸¸/ȲÀγ²/Kim DJ/Hwang YC/Oh WM/Hwang IN

Abstract

º» ¿¬±¸´Â °£Á¢ º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø Àη¹ÀÌ ¼öº¹ ½Ã ±âÀúÀç·Î »ç¿ëµÇ´Â ±¤ÁßÇÕÇü ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¿Í Àη¹ÀÌ Á¢Âø¿¡ »ç¿ëµÇ´Â ·¹Áø ½Ã¸àÆ®°£ÀÇ Á¢Âø Àü±îÁöÀÇ ½Ã°£ °æ°ú¿¡ µû¸¥ Àü´Ü °áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ°í, »ó¾ÆÁú°ú ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó, ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¿Í ·¹Áø ½Ã¸àÆ®°£ Á¢Âø°è¸é¿¡ ´ëÇØ SEM °üÂûÇÏ¿´´Ù. 2Á¾ÀÇ ±¤ÁßÇÕÇü ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ½Ã¸àÆ® Fuji II LC (GC Co, Tokyo, Japan)¿Í Vitrebond$^{TM}$ (3M, Paul, Minnesota, U.S.A)ÀÇ ½ÃÆíÀ» Á¦ÀÛÇÏ¿´´Ù 5 mmx7 mmÀÇ ½Ç¸®ÄÜ ÁÖÇü¿¡ Artglass$^{ (Heraeus Kultzer, Germany)¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ·¹Áø Àη¹À̸¦ Á¦ÀÛÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó º£À̽º¸¦ °¢ °¢ 1½Ã°£, 24½Ã°£, 1ÁÖ ¹× 2ÁÖ µ¿¾È 37$^{\circ}C$ Áõ·ù¼ö¿¡ º¸°üÇÑ ÈÄ Variolink$^{ II (Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein)¸¦ Àû¿ëÇÏ¿© Àη¹À̸¦ Á¢ÂøÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¸¸´É ¹°¼º½ÃÇè±â(Model 4302, Instron, U.S.A)¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© °áÇÕ ¸é¿¡ 1 mm/minÀÇ ¼Óµµ·Î 1000 kg ÇÏÁßÀ» °¡ÇÏ¿© Àü´Ü °áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´°í, one-way ANOVA¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© Åë°è ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. SEM °üÂûÀ» À§ÇØ ¹ß°ÅµÈ Á¦ 3´ë±¸Ä¡¿¡ 2±Þ ¿Íµ¿À» Çü¼ºÇÏ¿´°í, ±âÀúÀç·Î ±¤ÁßÇÕÇü ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ½Ã¸àÆ®¸¦ Àû¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. Àη¹À̸¦ Á¢ÂøÇÑ ½ÃÆíÀ» ¼öÁ÷ Àý´ÜÇÏ¿© »ó¾ÆÁú, ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó, ¹× º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø Àη¹ÀÌ °£ÀÇ °è¸éÀ» SEM (JSM-5400$^{ Jeol, Tokyo, Japan) °üÂûÇÏ¿´´Ù. ½Ã°£ °æ°ú¿¡ µû¸¥ ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¿Í º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø Àη¹ÀÌ »çÀÌÀÇ Àü´Ü °áÇÕ°­µµ´Â Åë°èÇÐÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ¾ø¾úÀ¸¸ç, ±âÀúÀç Àç·á¿¡ µû¸¥ Àü´Ü °áÇÕ°­µµÀÇ À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷À̵µ ¾ø¾úÀ¸¸ç ´ëºÎºÐ ½ÃÆí¿¡¼­ ±Û¶ó½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó ³»ºÎ¿¡¼­ ÀÀÁý Æı« (Cohesive failure)°¡ ¹ß»ýÇÏ¿´´Ù. SEM °üÂû ½Ã ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¿Í »ó¾ÆÁú »çÀÌ¿¡ ¾à 30-20 $\mu$rn Á¤µµÀÇ °£±Ø (gap)ÀÌ Çü¼ºµÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç , ±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¿Í º¹ÇÕ ·¹Áø Àη¹ÀÌ °è¸é¿¡¼­´Â 1½Ã°£ ÈÄ Á¢ÂøÇÑ ½ÃÆíÀ» Á¦¿ÜÇÏ°í °£±ØÀº ¹ß°ßµÇÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù.

This study was done to evaluate the shear bond strength between light-cured glass ionomer cement (GIC) base and resin cement for luting indirect resin inlay and to observe bonding aspects which is produced at the interface between them by SEM. Two types of light cured GIC (Fuji II LC Improved, GC Co. Tokyo, Japan and Vitrebond$^{TM}$, 3M, Paul Minnesota U.S.A) were used in this study. For shear bond test, GIC specimens were made and immersed in 37$^{\circ}C$ distilled water for 1 hour, 24 hours, 1 week and 2 weeks. Eighty resin inlays were prepared with Artglass$^{ (Heraeus Kultzer Germany) and luted with Variolink$^{ II (Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein). Shear bond strength of each specimen was measured and fractured surface were examined. Statistical analysis was done with one-way ANOVA. Twenty four extracted human third molars were selected and Class II cavities were prepared and GIC based at axiopulpal lineangle. The specimens were immersed in 37$^{\circ}C$ distilled water for 1 hour, 24 hours, 1 week and 2 weeks. And then the resin inlays were luted to prepared teeth. The specimens were sectioned vertically with low speed saw. The bonding aspect of the specimens were observed by SEM (JSM-5400$^{, Jeol, Tokyo, Japan) .There was no significant difference between the shear bond strength according to storage periods of light cured GIC base. And cohesive failure was mostly appeared in GIC On scanning electron micrograph, about 30 - 120 $\mu$m of the gaps were observed on the interface between GIC base and dentin. No gaps were observed on the interface between GTC and resin inlay. [J Kor Acad Cons Dent 30(3):158-169, 2005]

Å°¿öµå

Àü´Ü °áÇÕ°­µµ;±Û·¡½º¾ÆÀÌ¿À³ë¸Ó¿Í ·¹Áø Àη¹ÀÌ Á¢Âø

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI