Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎÀÇ ¿ª»ç¸é µðÀÚÀÎÀÌ º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·ÂºÐÆ÷¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ

The effect of implant system with reverse beveled platform design on marginal bone stress distribution

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Ã¶ÇÐȸÁö 2010³â 48±Ç 4È£ p.266 ~ 272
Â÷Áö¿µ, Á¶ÁøÇö, Á¶±¤Çå,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Â÷Áö¿µ ( Cha Ji-Young ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇÐÀü¹®´ëÇпø Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
Á¶ÁøÇö ( Cho Jin-Hyun ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇÐÀü¹®´ëÇпø Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
Á¶±¤Çå ( Jo Kwang-Hun ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡ÀÇÇÐÀü¹®´ëÇпø Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç

Abstract

¿¬±¸ ¸ñÀû: ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ ¿ª»ç¸éÀÇ µðÀÚÀÎÀÌ º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·ÂºÐÆ÷¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâÀ» ¾Ë¾Æº¸±â À§ÇØ À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼Ò¹ýÀ» »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ºñ±³ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

¿¬±¸Àç·á ¹× ¹æ¹ý:°æºÎ Á÷°æ 5.5 mm, ±æÀÌ 8 mmÀÇ ¸Å¸³Çü (submerged type) °íÁ¤Ã¼ (Dentis Co., Daegu, Korea)¸¦ ¿¬±¸¸ðµ¨·Î ¼±Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ ¿ª»ç¸éÀÇ µðÀÚÀÎÀ» ³ôÀÌ (h, 0.4 mm, 1.0 mm)¿ÍÆø°æ({5.5 - (3.34 + 2b)} / 2, [b, 0.2 mm, 0.3 mm, 0.4 mm])À» ´Ù¸£°Ô ÇÏ¿© ÃÑ ¿©¼¸ °¡ÁöÀÇ ½ÇÇè ÀÓÇöõÆ® Á¶ÇÕÀ¸·Î ±¸ºÐÇÏ¿´´Ù. Ãà´ëĪ À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼Ò¸ðµ¨¸µÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ÀÓÇöõÆ®/¾Ç°ñ º¹ÇÕü¿¡ ´ëÇØ ÀÓÇöõÆ® ÀåÃà¿¡ ÆòÇàÇÑ ¹æÇâÀ¸·Î Ä¡°ü ±³ÇÕ¸éÀÇ Á߽ɺο¡ ¼öÁ÷ ÇÏÁß 100 NÀÌ ÀÛ¿ëÇÒ ¶§ º¯¿¬°ñÀÇ ÃÖ´ë¾ÐÃàÀÀ·ÂÀ» »êÃâÇÏ¿© ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: ¿©¼¸ °³ÀÇ ¸ðµç ½ÇÇè ÀÓÇöõÆ® ¸ðµ¨¿¡¼­ º¯¿¬°ñÀÇ ÀÀ·ÂÁýÁßÀÌ °üÂûµÇÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù. º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·ÂÀº ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ ¿ª»ç¸éÀÇ Æø°ú ³ôÀÌÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ¿¡ µû¶ó ´Þ¶óÁö´Â °ÍÀÌ °üÂûµÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç »ç¸é°¢ÀÌ Å¬¼ö·Ï ÀÀ·Â ÁýÁßÀÌ Áõ°¡ÇÏ´Â °æÇâÀ» º¸¿´´Ù.

°á·Ð: ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ ¿ª»ç¸é µðÀÚÀÎÀÇ ºÎ¿©´Â º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·Â ºÐÆ÷ °³¼±¿¡ Áß¿äÇÑ ¿ªÇÒÀ» ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î ¿©°ÜÁø´Ù.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the surface morphology of the implant neck on marginal bone stress measured by using finite element analysis in six implant models.

Material and Methods : The submerged type rescue implant system (Dentis co., Daegu, Korea) was selected as an experimental model. The implants were divided into six groups whose implant necks were differently designed in terms of height (h, 0.4 and 1.0 mm) and width (platform width, w = 3.34 + 2b [b, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 mm]). Finite element models of implant/bone complex were created using an axisymmetric scheme. A load of 100 N was applied to the central node on the top of crown in parallel with the implant axis. The maximum compression stress was calculated and compared.

Results: Stress concentration commonly observed around dental implants did not occur in the marginal bone around all six test implant models. Marginal bone stress varied according to the implant neck bevel which had different width and height. The stress was affected more markedly by the difference in height than in width.

Conclusion: This result indicates that the implant neck bevel may play an important role in improving stress distribution in the marginal bone area.

Å°¿öµå

ÀÓÇöõÆ® °æºÎ; ¿ª»ç¸é; À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼ÒºÐ¼®; º¯¿¬°ñ ÀÀ·ÂºÐÆ÷
Implant neck; Reverse bevel; Finite element analysis; Marginal bone stress distribution

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed