Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ µðÀÚÀÎÀÌ º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·Â¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ

Influence of crestal module design on marginal bone stress around dental implant

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Ã¶ÇÐȸÁö 2010³â 48±Ç 3È£ p.224 ~ 231
ÀÓÁ¤¿­, Á¶ÁøÇö, Á¶±¤Çå,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÓÁ¤¿­ ( Lim Jung-Yoel ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇÐÀü¹®´ëÇпø Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
Á¶ÁøÇö ( Cho Jin-Hyun ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ º¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
Á¶±¤Çå ( Jo Kwang-Hun ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ º¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç

Abstract

¿¬±¸ ¸ñÀû: º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ µðÀÚÀÎÀÇ Ãø¸é¿¡¼­ ¹Ì¼¼³ª»ç, Ä¡Àº °üÅëºÎÀÇ °î¸é µðÀÚÀÎ Àû¿ë ¹× °æºÎ ¿ª»ç¸é ºÎ¿©È¿°ú¸¦ Á÷Á¢ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© Á¤·®ÀûÀÎ Æò°¡¸¦ ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

¿¬±¸ Àç·á ¹× ¹æ¹ý: Á÷°æ 4.1 mm, ±æÀÌ 10 mm ÀÇ ¸Å¸³Çü (submerged) °íÁ¤Ã¼ (Dentis Co., Daegu, Korea)¸¦ ±âº» Çü»óÀ¸·Î ¼³Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨·Î´Â ´ëÁ¶ ¸ðµ¨ÀÇ °æºÎ ÁÖÀ§, ÁïÄ¡Àº °üÅëºÎ/Áö´ëÁÖ Ã¼°á ¹æ¹ý¿¡ º¯È­¸¦ ÁØ ´Ù¼¸ °¡Áö °æ¿ì·Î ¼³Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù (½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ I: °æºÎÃø 3 mm ¿¡³ôÀÌ0.15 mm, ÇÇÄ¡ 0.3 mm ÀÇ ¹Ì¼¼³ª»ç (microthread)°¡ °¡°øµÈ ¸ðµ¨, ½ÇÇè¸ðµ¨II: ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ I °ú µ¿ÀÏÇÑ °íÁ¤Ã¼À̳ª, ¸Å¸³ÇüÀÌ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó 1-stage Çü (internal type) µðÀÚÀÎÀ» °¡Áø ¹Ì¼¼³ª»ç°¡ °¡°øµÈ ¸ðµ¨, ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ III: ¸Å½ÄºÎ ³ª»ç»êÀº ´ëÁ¶ ¸ðµ¨°ú µ¿ÀÏÇϳª 1-stage Çü °æºÎ µðÀÚÀÎÀ» °¡Áö´Â ¹Ì¼¼³ª»ç°¡ °¡°øµÇÁö ¾ÊÀº ¸ðµ¨, ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ IV: ÀÏüÇü (one piece system) ÀÓÇöõÆ®·Î Ä¡Àº °üÅëºÎ¿¡ 3 mm Á÷°æÀÇ ¸¸°î (concavity)Çü»óÀ»°®´Â¸ðµ¨, ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ V : ¸Å½ÄºÎ ³ª»ç»ê ¹× Áö´ëÁÖ´Â ´ëÁ¶ ¸ðµ¨°ú µ¿ÀÏÇϳª °íÁ¤Ã¼ platform °¡Àå ÀÚ¸®¿¡ ³ôÀÌ 1 mm ÀÇ ¿ª»ç¸é (reverse bevel)À»°®´Â¸ðµ¨). À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼ÒÇؼ®À»
À§ÇØPC¿ëÀ¸·Î Ãâ½ÃµÈ »ó¿ë ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÎ NISA II/Display III (EMRC, Troy, MI, USA)¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿©, Ãà´ëĪÀ¸·Î ÀÓÇöõÆ®/¾Ç°ñ Á¶ÇÕÀ» ¸ðµ¨¸µÇÏ¿´´Ù. °íÁ¤Ã¼ Çü»óÀº µ¿ÀÏÇϳª °æºÎ (¹× Ä¡Àº °üÅëºÎ) µðÀÚÀο¡ Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ÀÖ´Â ¿©¼¸ Á¾ÀÇ ÀÓÇöõÆ® (´ëÁ¶ ¸ðµ¨ + ´Ù¼¸ Á¾ ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨)¸¦ 9 mm Æø°æÀÇ ¾Ç°ñ¿¡ ½Ä¸³ÇÏ°í ÀÓÇöõÆ® ÀåÃà¿¡ ´ëÇØ 30µµÀÇ °¢µµ¸¦ °®´Â100 NÀÇ ÇÏÁßÀ» ¹Þ´Â Á¶°ÇÀ¸·Î ÀÓÇöõÆ®/°ñ º¹ÇÕüÀÇ ÀÀ·ÂÀ» Çؼ®ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ I°ú½ÇÇè¸ðµ¨IV¿¡¼­ º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·ÂÀÌ ¾à°£ ³·¾ÒÀ¸³ª ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ II, III, ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨V´Â ´ëÁ¶ ¸ðµ¨º¸´Ù º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·ÂÀÌ ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ÃÖ´ë ÀýÁ¡ÀÀ·ÂÀÌ ±â·ÏµÈ ÀÓÇöõÆ®·ÎºÎÅÍ 0.2 mm ¶³¾îÁø À§Ä¡¿¡¼­ÀÇ ÀÀ·ÂÀº ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ III¿¡¼­ 21.11 MPa·Î °¡Àå ³ô¾Ò°í ½ÇÇè ¸ðµ¨ II¿Í½ÇÇè¸ðµ¨V´Â ºñ½ÁÇÑ ¼öÁØÀ¸·Î °¢°¢ 18.39 MPa, 17.88 MPaÀ̾úÀ¸¸ç ½ÇÇè¸ðµ¨ I, IV´Â ´ëÁ¶¸ðµ¨ÀÇ 15.09 MPa º¸´Ù ¾à°£ ³·Àº 14.78 MPa, 14.63 MPa ¿´´Ù.

°á·Ð: °æºÎÀÇ ¹Ì¼¼³ª»ç¿Í Ä¡Àº °üÅëºÎÀÇ °î¸é (concavity) ºÎ¿©°¡ º¯¿¬°ñÀÇ ÀÀ·ÂÁýÁß ¹æÁö¿¡ È¿°ú°¡ ÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù.

Purpose This study was to investigate how the crestal module design could affect the level of marginal bone stress around dental implant.

Materials and methods A submerged implant of 4.1 mm in diameter and 10 mm in length was selected as baseline model (Dentis Co., Daegu,Korea).A total of 5 experimental implants of different crestal modules were designed (Type I model : with microthread at the cervical 3 mm, Type II model : the same thread pattern as Type I but with a trans-gingival module, Type III model: the same thread pattern as the control model but with a trans-gingival module, Type IV model: one piece system with concave transgingival part, Type V model: equipped with beveled platform). Stress analysis was conducted with the use of axisy mmetric finite element modeling scheme. A force of 100 N was applied at 30 degrees from the implant axis.

Results Stress analysis has shown no stress concentration around the marginal bone for the control model. As compared to the control model, the stress levels of 0.2 mm areas away from the recorded implant were slightly lower in Type I and Type IV models, but higher in Type II, Type III and Type V models. As compared to 15.09 MPa around for the control model, the stress levels were 14.78 MPa, 18.39 MPa, 21.11 MPa, 14.63 MPa, 17.88 MPa in the cases of Type I, II, III, IV and V models.

Conclusion From these results, the conclusion was drawn that the microthread and the concavity with either crestal or trans-gingival modules maybe used in standard size dental implants to reduce marginal bone stress.

Å°¿öµå

ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ µðÀÚÀÎ;Ä¡Àº °üÅëºÎ;À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼Ò¹ý;°æºÎ°ñ ÀÀ·Â
Crestal module design;Trans-gingival module;Marginal bone stress

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed