Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼öÁ¾ÀÇ ¼¶À¯ °­È­ ·¹Áø Æ÷½ºÆ®ÀÇ ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ¿Í ½Äº°µµ Æò°¡

EVALUATION OF RADIOPACITY AND DISCRIMINABILITY OF VARIOUS FIBER REINFORCED COMPOSITE POSTS

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Á¸ÇÐȸÁö 2010³â 35±Ç 3È£ p.188 ~ 197
ÀÌÀºÇý, ÃÖÇ×¹®, ¹Ú¼¼Èñ, ±èÁø¿ì, Á¶°æ¸ð,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÌÀºÇý ( Lee Eun-Hye ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç
ÃÖÇ×¹® ( Choi Hang-Moon ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¹æ»ç¼±Çб³½Ç
¹Ú¼¼Èñ ( Park Se-Hee ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç
±èÁø¿ì ( Kim Jin-Woo ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç
Á¶°æ¸ð ( Cho Kyung-Mo ) - °­¸ª¿øÁÖ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç

Abstract

º» ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº ¼öÁ¾ÀÇ ¼¶À¯ °­È­ ·¹Áø Æ÷½ºÆ®ÀÇ ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ¿Í ½Äº°µµ¸¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. À̹ø ½ÇÇèÀ» À§ÇØ 1) FRC Postec Plus (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) 2) Snowlight (Carbotech, Lewis center, OH, USA) 3) Dentin Post (Komet Brasseler, Lamgo, Germany) 4) Rely-X Fiber Post (3M ESPE, St.paul, MN, USA) 5) D.T.-Light Post (BISCO, Schaumburg, IL,USA ) 6) Luxapost (DMG, Hamburg, Germany) µî 6Á¾ÀÇ ¼¶À¯ °­È­ ·¹Áø Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. °¢ Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¦ Âü°í ±âÁØÀ¸·Î »ç¿ëÇÑ 1 mm, 2 mm °£°ÝÀÇ ¾Ë·ç¹Ì´½ step-wedge¿Í ÇÔ²² µðÁöÅм¾¼­¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ¹æ»ç¼± ÃÔ¿µÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ´Â °¢ Æ÷½ºÆ®ÀÇ ´Ù¼¸ ÁöÁ¡¿¡¼­ È­¼ÒÀÇ Æò±Õ ȸ»öÁ¶ °ªÀ¸·Î °è»êÇÏ¿´°í µ¿ÀÏ µÎ²²ÀÇ ¾Ë·ç¹Ì´½ ´ç·®À¸·Î ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Ä¡¾Æ ½ÃÆíÀ¸·Î ºñ½ÁÇÑ ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ¸¦ º¸ÀÌ´Â »ó¾Ç ÀüÄ¡ 6°³¿¡ Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¦ ½Ä¸³ ÈÄ °ÇÁ¶ ÇϾǰñÀÇ ¼³Ãø¿¡ À§Ä¡½ÃÄÑ ¹æ»ç¼± »çÁøÀ» ÃÔ¿µÇÏ¿´´Ù. Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¸À» ÃÔ¿µÇÑ »çÁø°ú Ä¡¾Æ ½ÃÆíÀÇ ¹æ»ç¼± »çÁøµéÀ» ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¹æ»ç¼±°ú Àü°øÀÚ 3¸í, Ä¡°úº¸Á¸°ú Àü°øÀÚ 3¸í, ÀÏ¹Ý Ä¡°ú ÀÇ»ç 3¸í¿¡°Ô º¸¿©ÁÖ°í ¼³¹®Áö¸¦ ÀÛ¼ºÇϵµ·Ï ¿äûÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¼³¹®Áö´Â Æ÷½ºÆ®¿Í Æ÷½ºÆ®°¡ ½Ä¸³µÈ Ä¡¾Æ ½ÃÆí »çÁø¿¡¼­ ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ°¡ °¡Àå ³ôÀº Æ÷½ºÆ®¿Í ³·Àº Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¦ °í¸£´Â ¹®Ç×, Ä¡±Ù´Ü°ú Ä¡°üºÎ ³¡¿¡¼­ ÀÎÁ¢ »ó¾ÆÁú°ú °¡Àå ½Äº°ÀÌ ÀߵǴ Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¦ °í¸£´Â ¹®Ç×À» Æ÷ÇÔÇÏ¿´´Ù. ½ÇÇèÀÇ °á°ú´Â ´ÙÀ½°ú °°¾Ò´Ù. 1. °¢ FRC-Post´Â ´Ù¾çÇÑ ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù. 2. °¡Àå ³ôÀº ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ¿Í °¡Àå ³·Àº ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ¸¦ °¡Áö´Â Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¦ °í¸£´Â Áú¹®¿¡¼­ Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¸ ³ª¿­ÇÑ °æ¿ì ½ÇÇ豺 ¸ðµÎ 100%ÀÇ Á¤´ä·üÀ» º¸¿´À¸³ª Æ÷½ºÆ®¸¦ Ä¡¾Æ¿¡ ³Ö°í Ä¡Á¶°ñÀ» Áßø½ÃŲ °æ¿ì Á¤´ä·üÀÇ º¯È­¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù. 3. Æ÷½ºÆ® ÁÖº¯ »ó¾ÆÁú°ú ±¸ºÐµÇ´Â Á¤µµ¸¦ ¹¯´Â Áú¹®¿¡ ´ëÇØ ½ÃÆíÀÇ Á¶ÇÕ ¼ø¼­¸¦ ¹Ù²ÙÀÚ ÀÏ°üµÈ ½Äº° °á°ú¸¦ º¸ÀÌÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù. ÀÌ¿¡ º» ¿¬±¸¿¡ »ç¿ëÇÑ Æ÷½ºÆ®´Â ´Ù¾çÇÑ ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ¸¦ º¸À̳ª ½Äº° ´É·Â¿¡ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¥ Á¤µµÀÇ ¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ Â÷À̸¦ º¸ÀÌÁö ¾Ê´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.

The purpose of this study was to compare radiopacity and radiographic discriminability of various FRC-Posts. Six FRC-Posts were investigated ; 1) FRC Postec Plus (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein), 2) Snowlight (Carbotech, Lewis center, OH, USA), 3) Dentin Post (Komet Brasseler, Lamgo, Germany), 4) Rely-X Fiber Post (3M ESPE, St.paul, MN, USA), 5) D.T.-Light Post (BISCO, Schaumburg, IL,USA), 6) Luxapost (DMG, Hamburg, Germany) The radiographs of each post with a reference 1 mm / 2 mm aluminum step-wedge was taken using digital sensor. The optical density were calculated by gray value of pixel and compared in mm Al equivalent at five points. Six maxillary incisors of similar radiopacity were used. Radiographs of posts in Mx. incisors of lingual side of dry mandible were taken. We showed radiographs and asked the questionnaire to 3 radiologists, 3 endodontists, 3 general practitioners. The questionnaire was comprised of choices of the highest, lowest radiopaque individual post and the choices of best discriminable post at apical, coronal area. The following results were obtained. 1. Each post system showed various radiopacity. 2. There was change of discriminability between each post and simulated specimens regardless of examiner. Although each post showed various radiopacity, the difference of radiopacity did not affect on discriminability.

Å°¿öµå

¹æ»ç¼± ºÒÅõ°úµµ; ¼¶À¯ °­È­ ·¹Áø Æ÷½ºÆ®; ½Äº°µµ; µðÁöÅм¾¼­; ¾Ë·ç¹Ì´½ step-wedge; ¾Ë·ç¹Ì´½ ´ç·®
Radiopacity; FRC-post; Discriminability; Digital sensor; Aluminum step-wedge; mm Al equivalent

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI