Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

°£Á¢¹ýÀ¸·Î Á¦ÀÛµÈ º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø Àη¹ÀÌÀÇ ÀÎÁ¢¸é ÀûÇÕµµ ºñ±³

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úÀÇ»çÇùȸÁö 2004³â 42±Ç 9È£ p.632 ~ 637
¾ç¼ºÇö, ÀÌÁÖÈñ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¾ç¼ºÇö ( Yang Sung-Hyun ) - °¡Å縯´ëÇб³ ÀÓ»óÄ¡°úÇдëÇпø ½É¹Ì¼öº¹Ä¡°úÇаú
ÀÌÁÖÈñ ( Lee Ju-Hee ) - °¡Å縯´ëÇб³ ÀÓ»óÄ¡°úÇдëÇпø ½É¹Ì¼öº¹Ä¡°úÇаú

Abstract


Purpose : The purpose of this study was to compare the proximal marginal gap widths between two different indirect composite resin systems.

Materials and Methods : Two types of materials were used in this study : Artglass (Heraeus Kulzer Co, Wehrheim, Germany) and TESCERA (BISCO. Ins, U. S. A.). The metal model prepared in the MOD cavity was impressed with 40 impression bodies with the same kind of silicon (PRESIDENT microsystem, regular / light body, Coltene, Swiss).
Artglass : 10 inlay bodies (2 layers), 10 inlay bodies (3 layers)
TESCERA : 10 inlay bodies (2 layers), 10 inlay bodies (3 layers)
Marginal accuracy was measured by the Image Analyzer and microscope on six points of a metal model.

Results : The gap widths in the two types of TESCERA inlay were similar to those of the two types of Artglass inlay (p>0.05). However, in this study the maximum gap width was 137 §­ for the Artglass 2 layers and there were three failed inlay bodies (gap width>100 §­). 96.7% of the Artglass and 98.3% of the TESCERA gap widths were under 100 §­. There was a total of 5 inlay bodies with failed gap widths over 100 §­.

Conclusion : Within the limitations of this study, the MOD inlays of the indirect composite resins were acceptable for clinical application on the proximal margin with gap width under 100 §­.

Å°¿öµå

gap width;indirect composite resin;MOD inlay;proximal margin

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI