Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Æijë¶ó¸¶¹æ»ç¼±»çÁø¿¡ À־ ÀÌÂ÷»ó¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸

A STUDY ON SECONDARY IMAGES IN PANORAMIC RADIOGRAPH

Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼± 1984³â 14±Ç 1È£ p.81 ~ 87
Á¶´ëÈñ, ÀÌÁøÈ«,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Á¶´ëÈñ (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ º´¸®Çб³½Ç
ÀÌÁøÈ« (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼±Çб³½Ç

Abstract

ÀúÀÚ´Â Àηù°ÇÁ¶µÎ°³°ñÀÇ ÁÖ¿ä ÇغÎÇÐÀû±¸Á¶¹° ¹× ÀÓÀÇ·Î ¼±ÅÃÇÑ ºÎÀ§¿¡ ¹æ»ç¼±ºÒÅõ°ú¼º
¹°Ã¼¸¦ ºÎÂøÇÑ ÈÄ ¸ð¸®´Ùȸ»çÁ¦ Panex-EC¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ÃÑ 65¸ÅÀÇ Æijë¶ó¸¶¹æ»ç¼±»çÁøÀ» ÃÔ
¿µÇÏ¿© º» ³í¹®¿¡ ÇÕ¸ñÀûÀÎ 17¸Å¸¦ ¼±º°ÇÏ¿© ÀÌÂ÷»óÀ» °üÂû ¹× ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© ¾Æ·¡¿Í °°Àº °á°ú
¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1 °æÃßÀÇ »óÀÌ Çʸ§ÀÇ Á¤ÁߺÎÀ§¿Í Á¿ìÃø¹æºÎÀ§ µî ¼¼ ºÎÀ§¿¡¼­ ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç Á¤ÁߺÎÀ§¿¡¼­
´Â ÈÄÀü¹æÅõ°ú»óÀÌ È帮°Ô, Á¿ìÃø¹æºÎÀ§¿¡¼­´Â Ãø¹æÅõ°ú»óÀÌ º¸´Ù ¼±¸íÇÏ°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç Ư
È÷ 1¹ø°æÃß Àü¸é°áÀýÀÇ »óÀÌ Á¿ìÃø ÇϾǰæ Á÷ÇϹ濡 ÁßøµÇ¾î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
2. ÇϾǰñ¿¡¼­´ÂÇϾÇÁöÈÄ¿¬ÀÇ ÀÌÂ÷»óÀÌ ¹Ý´ëÃø ÇϾÇÁöÀü¿¬ºÎÀ§·Î ºÎÅÍ ÇϾÇÁö »ó¹æºÎÀ§±î
Áö ÈĹæÀ¸·Î ±æ°Ô ¿¬ÀåµÇ¾î ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç, °úµÎÀÇ ÀÌÂ÷»óÀÌ ¹Ý´ëÃø ±Ùµ¹±â, ÇϾÇÀýÈç ±×¸®°í
°úµÎÀÇ »ó¹æ¿¡ ±æ°Ô ¿¬ÀåµÈ »óÀ¸·Î °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù.
3. »ó¾Ç°ñ¿¡¼­´Â ±¸°³ºÎ ÈĹæºÎÀ§·ÎºÎÅÍ ¾ß±âµÈ ÀÌÂ÷»óÀÌ ºñ°­ÀÇ ÇϹæºÎÀ§¿Í »ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ ³»
Ãøº®¿¡ ÁßøµÇ¾î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
4. Èĵΰú¿Í À¯¾çµ¹±âÀÇ ÀÏÂ÷»óÀº °ÅÀÇ µ¿ÀÏÇÑ ºÎÀ§¿¡ ÁßøµÇ¾î ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç ÈĵΰúÀÇ ÀÌ
Â÷»ó¸¸ ÀÌ ±× ¹Ý´ëÃø ÈĵΰúÀÇ ÀÏÂ÷»ó À§¿¡ À¯»çÇÑ ÇüÅ·Π¾à°£ È®´ëµÇ¾î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
5. µÎ°³ÀúÀÇ Á¤ÁߺÎÀ§¿¡ À§Ä¡ÇÑ ÀýµÎµ¿ÇÏ¿¬, ÅäÀ̱â¾È, Á¢°ñµ¿ÇÏ¿¬ ¹× Èĵΰñ ÈĹæºÎÀ§ÀÇ
»óÀÌÁ¤Áß¼±À» Áß½ÉÇÏ¿© À¯»çÇÑ ÇüÅ·ΠÁÂ¿ì ´ëĪÀûÀ¸·Î ¾çÃø¿¡ º¸¿´À¸¸ç Èĵΰñ ÈĹæºÎÀ§°¡
ÈĵΰúÀÇ »ó°ú ¿¬°áµÇ¾î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
6. ÃøµÎ°ñÃßüºÎÀÇ ÀÌÂ÷»óÀÌ ÅäÀ̱â¾È ¿ÜÃø¹æÇâ¿¡¼­, Á¢Çü°ñ¼ÒÀÍÈÄ¿¬°ú Á¢Çü°ñ´ëÀÍ»ó¿¬ ¹×
Á¢Çü°ñÈÄ¿¬ÀÇ ÀÌÂ÷»óÀÌ ÅäÀ̱â¾È Àü»ó¹æºÎÀ§¿Í ÇϹæºÎÀ§¿¡ ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
This study was performed to observe the secondary images and to analyse the
relationships between the primary and secondary images in panoramic radiograph.
Using the Moritta's Panex-EC panoramic x-ray machine and the human dry skull, the
author analysed 17 radiographs which were selected from 65 radiographs of the dry
skull that attached tao radiopaque materials, and the attached regions of the radiopaque
materials were the normal anatomical structures which were important and selected as a
regions for the evaluation of the secondary images effectively.
The results were as follows;
1. The cervical vertebrae showed three images. The midline image was the most
distorted and less clear, and bilateral images were slightly superimposed over the
posterior border of the mandibular ramus.
2. In mandible, the secondary image of the posterior border of the ramus was
superimposed on the opposite ramus region, and this image was elongated from the
anterior border of the ramus to the lateral side of the posterior border of the ramus.
The secondary image of the condyle was observed on the upper area of the coronoid
process, the sigmoid notch and the condyle in opposite side.
3. In maxilla, the posterior region of the hard palate showed the secondary image on
the lower part of the nasal cavity and the medial wall of the maxillary sinus,
4. The primary images of the occipital condyle and the mastoid process appeared on
the same region, and only the secondary image of the occipital condyle was observed
symmetrically on the opposite side with similar shape to the primary one.
5. In the cranial base, the anatomical structures of the midsagittal portions like a
inferior border of the frontal sinus, sella turcica, inferior border of the sphenoid sinus
and inferior border of the posterior part of the occipital bone showed the simillar shape
between the primary and secondary images symmetrically.
6. The petrous portion of the temporal bone showed the secondary image on the
lateral side of the sella-turcica, and the secondary images of the posterior border of
lesser wing, superior border of greater wing of the sphenoid bone and posterior border
were observed on the anterior-superior and inferior region of the sella-turcica.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸