Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

»ó¾ÆÁú-º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø Á¢Âø°è¸éÀÇ Æı«°Åµ¿¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¿¬±¸

A STUDY ON FRACTURAL BEHAVIOR OF DENTIN-RESIN INTERFACE

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Á¸ÇÐȸÁö 2007³â 32±Ç 3È£ p.208 ~ 221
·ù±æÁÖ, ÃÖ±â¿î, ¹Ú»óÁø, ÃÖ°æ±Ô,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
·ù±æÁÖ ( Ryu Gil-Joo ) - °æÈñ´ëÇб³ ´ëÇпø Ä¡ÀÇÇаú Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç
ÃÖ±â¿î ( Choi Gi-Woon ) - °æÈñ´ëÇб³ ´ëÇпø Ä¡ÀÇÇаú Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç
¹Ú»óÁø ( Park Sang-Jin ) - °æÈñ´ëÇб³ ´ëÇпø Ä¡ÀÇÇаú Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç
ÃÖ°æ±Ô ( Choi Kyoung-Kyu ) - °æÈñ´ëÇб³ ´ëÇпø Ä¡ÀÇÇаú Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç

Abstract

Æı« Àμº ½ÇÇèÀº »ó¾ÆÁú-º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø °è¸éÀÇ ÆÄÀý ÀúÇ×¼ºÀ» Æò°¡ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ÀÓ»óÀûÀ¸·Î ½Å·Ú ÇÒ ¸¸ÇÑ ¹æ¹ýÀÌ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº »ó¾ÆÁú-·¹Áø °è¸éÀÇ Æı«Àμº°ú ¹Ì¼¼ÀÎÀå°áÇÕ°­µµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© ÀÌ µÎ ½ÇÇè¹æ¹ýÀÌ »ó¾ÆÁú-·¹Áø °áÇÕÀ» Æò°¡ÇÏ´Â µ¥ °¡Áö´Â À¯¿ë¼ºÀ» ºñ±³, Æò°¡ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù Æı« Àμº ÃøÁ¤¿¡´Â short-rod ½ÃÆí ÇüŸ¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. °¢ ½ÃÆí¿¡¼­´Â ¼ÒÀÇ ÇϾÇÀýÄ¡¿¡¼­ Àý´ÜÇÑ Ä¡¾Æ ÀýÆíÀ» Æ÷ÇÔ½ÃÄÑ °áÇÕ¸éÀ» ¾ò¾ú´Ù. ¹Ì¼¼ÀÎÀå °áÇÕ°­µµ ¶ÇÇÑ ¼ÒÀÇ ÇϾÇÀýÄ¡ ¼ø¸éÀ» ¿¬¸¶ÇÏ¿© »ó¾ÆÁúÀ» ³ëÃâ½ÃŲ ÈÄ »ó¾ÆÁú Á¢ÂøÁ¦¸¦ µµÆ÷ÇÏ°í ·¹Áø ºí·ÏÀ» ÃàÁ¶ÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. °¢ ½ÃÆíµéÀº 37¡É Áõ·ù¼ö¿¡ 24½Ã°£ º¸°üÇÑ ÈÄ °¢ ½ÇÇè¹æ¹ý¿¡ ¸Â°Ô ÀÎÀå·ÂÀ» °¡ÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤Ä¡¸¦ ±¸ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Åë°èºÐ¼®Àº 95% ½Å·Ú¼öÁØÀÇ ANOVA¿Í Tukey¡¯¡¯s test¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, µÎ ½ÇÇè¹æ¹ýÀÇ »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ º¸±â À§ÇØ Pearson¡¯¡¯s »ó°ü°è¼ö¸¦ °è»êÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀüÀÚÇö¹Ì°æ °Ë»ç¸¦ ÅëÇØ ¹Ì¼¼±¸Á¶ ¶ÇÇÑ °üÂûÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ» ¾ò¾ú´Ù. 1. Æı«ÀμºÀº SE±ºÀÌ °¡Àå ³ôÀº °ªÀ» ³ªÅ¸³ÂÀ¸¸ç, Adper Single Bond 2 (SB), OptiBond Solo (OB) ONE-STEP PLUS (OS), ScotchBond Multi-purpose (SM)±º ¼øÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ°í, Clearfil SE Bond (SE)±ºÀº ´Ù¸¥ ½ÇÇ豺¿¡ ºñÇØ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ³ôÀº °ªÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾úÀ¸³ª (p <0.05), ´Ù¸¥ ½ÇÇ豺 »çÀÌ¿¡´Â À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù (p > 0.05). 2. ¹Ì¼¼ÀÎÀå°áÇÕ°­µµ´Â SE±ºÀÌ °¡Àå ³ôÀº °ªÀ» ³ªÅ¸³ÂÀ¸¸ç, SB, OB, SM, ±×¸®°í OS ¼øÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. SB, OB, SM, SE±º »çÀÌ¿¡´Â Åë°èÇÐÀûÀÎ À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ¾ø¾úÀ¸³ª (p > 0.05), OS±ºÀÇ ¹Ì¼¼ÀÎÀå°áÇÕ°­µµ´Â ´Ù¸¥ 4°³ÀÇ ½ÇÇ豺¿¡ ºñÇØ ³·Àº °ªÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù (p < 0.05). 3. FE-SEM°üÂû¿¡¼­ ÇǸ·µµ°¡ µÎ²®°Ô ³ªÅ¸³­ SM±º, SE±º°ú ÇǸ·µµ°¡ ¾ãÀº OS±º, OB±º, SB±º °£¿¡ Æı«¾ç»óÀÌ ´Ù¸£°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù Áï ÀüÀÚ´Â Á¢ÂøÃþ ³» Æı«°¡ ÀϾ ¹Ý¸é, ÈÄÀÚ´Â resin tag³ª ·¹Áø ħÅõÃþ ³»¿¡¼­ ÆÄÀýµÇ´Â ¾ç»óÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù. 4. Æı« Àμº°ú ¹Ì¼¼ÀÎÀå°áÇÕ°­µµ »çÀÌ¿¡´Â Åë°èÇÐÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀÇ ÇÑ »ó°ü °ü°è°¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù (r2=0.223, t=0.927). ÀÌ¿Í °°Àº °á°ú¸¦ Åä´ë·Î, »ó¾ÆÁú Á¢ÂøÁ¦ÀÇ ÀÓ»óÀû È¿À²¼ºÀ» Æò°¡ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÒ ¶§´Â °áÇÕ°­µµ »Ó¸¸ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó. Æı«Àμºµµ ÇÔ²² °í·ÁÇÏ¿© ÀÓ»óÀû¿ëÀÇ ¿¹°ß¼ºÀ» ³ô¿©¾ß ÇÑ´Ù°í °á·Ð³»¸± ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù.

The fracture toughness test is believed as a clinically relevant method for assessing the fracture resistance of the dentinal restoratives. The objectives of this study were to measure the fracture toughness (K1C) and microtensile bond strength of dentin-resin composite interface and compare their relationship for their use in evaluation of the integrity of the dentin-resin bond. A minimum of six short-rod specimens for fracture toughness test and fifteen specimens for microtensile bond strength test was fabricated for each group of materials used. After all specimens storing for 24 hours in distilled water at 37¡É, they were tensile-loaded with an EZ tester universal testing machin. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Tukey¡¯¡¯s test at the 95% confidence level, Pearson¡¯¡¯s coefficient was used to verify the correlation between the mean of fracture toughness and microtensile bond strength. FE-SEM was employed on fractured surface to describe the crack propagation. Fracture toughness value of Clearfil SE Bond (SE) was the highest, followed by Adper Single Bond 2 (SB), OptiBond Solo (OB), ONE-STEP PLUS (0S), ScotchBond Multi-purpose (SM) and there was significant difference between SE and other 4 groups (p < 0.05). There were, however, no significant difference among SB, OB, OS, SM (p > 0.05). Microtensile bond strength of SE was the highest, followed by SB, OB, SM, OS and OS only showed significant lower value (p < 0.05). There was no correlation between fracture toughness and microtensile bond strength values. FE-SEM examination revealed that dentin bonding agent showed different film thickness and different failure pattern according to the film thickness. From the limited results of this study, it was noted that there was statistically no correlation between K1C and muTBS. We can conclude that for obtaining the reliability of bond strength test of dentin bonding agent, we must pay more attention to the test procedure and its profound scrutiny.

Å°¿öµå

Æı« Àμº;¹Ì¼¼ÀÎÀå°áÇÕ°­µµ;short-rod ½ÃÆí;»ó¾ÆÁú-º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø °è¸é;»ó¾ÆÁú Á¢ÂøÁ¦
Fracture toughness;Microtensile bond strength;Short-rod specimen;Dentin-resin composite interface;FE-SEM;Dentin bonding agent

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI