Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

»ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ ½ÇÇ躴¼Ò¿¡ °üÇÑ X¼±ÇÐÀû ¿¬±¸

A RADIOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE EXPERIMENTAL LESIONS IN THE MAXILLARY SINUS

Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼± 1994³â 24±Ç 1È£ p.115 ~ 127
ÀÌÁÖÇö, ȲÀÇ°ü, ±èűÇ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÌÁÖÇö (  ) - °æÈñ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼±Çб³½Ç
ȲÀÇ°ü (  ) - °æÈñ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼±Çб³½Ç
±èűǠ(  ) - °æÈñ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼±Çб³½Ç

Abstract

»ó¾Çµ¿Àº ÇغÎÇÐÀû º¯ÀÌ°¡ ¸¹°í X¼±»çÁø¿¡¼­ ¿©·¯ ±¸Á¶µéÀÇ ÁßøÀ¸·Î ÀÎÇÏ¿©, Áúȯ¿¡ ÀÇ
ÇÏ¿© ¾ß±âµÈ »ó¾Çµ¿ º´¼Ò¸¦ Áø´ÜÇϱ⠰ï¶õÇÑ °æ¿ì°¡ ¸¹´Ù. ÀÌ¿¡ ÀúÀÚ´Â »ó¾Çµ¿º´º¯ÀÇ Áø´Ü
¿¡ À־, °¢ X¼±»çÁøÀÇ »óÀ» ºÐ¼® Æò°¡Çϴµ¥ µµ¿òÀ» ÁÖ°íÀÚ °ÇÁ¶µÎ°³°ñÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î »ó¾Ç
µ¿ÀÇ °¢ ³»º®¿¡ Á÷°æÀÌ 10 §®ÀÎ ¹æ»ç¼±ºÒÅõ°ú¼º °í¹«°øÀ» ºÎÂøÇÏ¿© ÃÔ¿µµÈ ÆÇÅä¸ð±×·¥°ú
Waters¹ý»çÁø¿¡¼­ ÀÌÀÇ À§Ä¡»óŸ¦ °üÂûÇÏ°í,»ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ °¢ ³»º®¿¡ ¹æ»ç¼±Åõ°ú¼º ¹× ¹æ»ç¼±ºÒ
Åõ°ú¼º ¹Ì¼¼º´¼Ò¸¦ Çü¼ºÇÏ¿© Ä¡±Ù´ÜX¼±»çÁø, ÆÇÅä¸ð±×·¥ ¹× Waters¹ý»çÁøÀ» ÃÔ¿µÇÑ ÈÄ °¢
ÃÔ¿µ¼ú¿¡¼­ º´¼ÒÀÇ Æǵ¶ °¡´É Á¤µµ¸¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´ø ¹Ù ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á°ú¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1. »ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ °¢ ³»º®¿¡ ºÎÂø½ÃŲ ½ÇÇ躴¼ÒÀÇ »óÀº ÆÇÅä¸ð±×·¥¿¡¼­´Â Èĺ®°ú »ó¾Çµ¿Àú¿¡¼­,
Waters¹ý »çÁø¿¡¼­´Â Àüº®°ú ³»Ãøº®¿¡¼­ ÀüÈÄ¹æ ¹× ³»¿ÜÃøÀÇ À§Ä¡°ü°è°¡ Á¤È®ÇÏ°Ô °üÂûµÇ
¾ú´Ù.
2. ¹æ»ç¼±Åõ°ú¼º º´¼Ò´Â Ä¡±Ù´ÜX¼±»çÁø¿¡¼­ Á÷°æÀÌ 1.0 §®À϶§ »ó¾Çµ¿Àú¿¡¼­, ÆÇÅä¸ð±×·¥
¿¡¼­´Â 2.0 min À϶§ ¸ðµç »ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ ³»º®¿¡¼­, Waters¹ý»çÁø¿¡¼­´Â 3.0 §®À϶§ »ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ Àü
º®¿¡¼­ À̵éÀÇ Æǵ¶ÀÌ °¡´ÉÇÏ¿´´Ù.
3. ¹æ»ç¼±ºÒÅõ°ú¼º º´¼Ò´Â Ä¡±Ù´ÜX¼±»çÁø¿¡¼­ Á÷°æÀÌ 0.5 §®À϶§ »ó¾Çµ¿Àú¿¡¼­ ¸íÈ®È÷ ÆÇ
µ¶µÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, ÆÇÅä¸ð±×·¥¿¡¼­´Â 0.5 §®À϶§ ¸ðµç »ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ ³»º®¿¡¼­ Æǵ¶°¡´ÉÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç,
Waters¹ý»çÁø¿¡¼­´Â 0.5 §®À϶§ »ó¾Çµ¿ÀÇ Àüº®¿¡¼­,0.75 §®À϶§ Àüº®,¿ÜÃøº® ¹× »ó¾Çµ¿Àú¿¡
¼­ À̵éÀÇ Æǵ¶ÀÌ °¡´ÉÇÏ¿´´Ù.
À§¿Í°°Àº ½ÇÇè°á°ú·ÎºÎÅÍ Ä¡±Ù´ÜX¼±»çÁøÀº »ó¾Çµ¿ÀúÀÇ ¹Ì¼¼°ñº´¼ÒÀÇ Æǵ¶¿¡ À¯¿ëÇϸç, ÆÇ
Åä¸ð±×·¥Àº »ó¾Çµ¿³»ÀÇ Àü¹ÝÀûÀÎ º¯È­»óÀ» °üÂûÇϱ⠿ëÀÌÇϳª,°¢ ³»º®ÀÇ ÁßøÀ¸·Î ÀÎÇÏ¿©
Èĺ®°ú »ó¾Çµ¿Àú¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇÏ°í´Â º´¼ÒÀÇ Á¤È®ÇÑ À§Ä¡¸¦ ÆǺ°Çϱ⠰ï¶õÇÏ´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ Waters¹ý»ç
ÁøÀº ÆÇÅä¸ð±×·¥¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© °üÂû¹üÀ§°¡ Á¦Çѵǰí Èĺ®°ú »ó¾Çµ¿Àú°¡ »ó¾ÇÄ¡¾Æ¿Í ÁßøµÇ´Â ´Ü
Á¡ÀÌ ÀÖÀ¸³ª Àüº®ÀÇ º´¼Ò´Â Á¤È®È÷ Æǵ¶ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. µû¶ó¼­ »ó¾Çµ¿ º´º¯ÀÇ Á¤È®ÇÑ Áø´Ü°ú
Á¤È®ÇÑ Æò°¡¸¦ À§ÇÏ¿©¼­´Â À̵é ÃÔ¿µ¹ýÀÌ »óÈ£º¸¿ÏÀûÀ¸·Î ÀÌ¿ëµÇ¾î¾ß ÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in representation of a
globular radiopaque mass on the pantomograms and Waters' views and to compare the
efficacy of periapical radiograms, pantomograms and Waters' views in detection of
defects on the internal walls of the maxillary sinus.
This study was performed with dried human skull. For the study of difference of
radiopaque mass shadow in the two views, °Übber ball with a diameter of 10 mm was
used as the experimental lesion. It was placed successively on the internal wall of the
anterior, posterior, medial, lateral walls and floor of the maxillary sinus.
To examine the detectability of defects for radiographic techniques, defects were
formed in the anterior, posterior, medial, lateral walls, and floor of the maxillary sinus.
They were formed with 0.5§®, 0.75§®, 1.0§® 2.0§® and 3.0§® sized steel round burs with
a slow speed dental handpiece. By subsequently plugging the holes with zinc oxide
eugenol paste, radiopaque defects were produced. After that the periapical radiograms,
the pantomograms and the Waters' views were taken each and every defect.
The obtained results were as follows:
1. Rubber balls placed on each internal wall of the maxillary sinus were conectly
depicted on the posterior wall and the floor in case of the pantomogrsut and on the
anterior wall and the medial wall in case of the Waters' veiw
2. On the detectability of defects for each radiographic technique, radiolucent defects
were detected in different places for each technique. Periapical radiogram could detect
1.0§® defect on the floor of the maxillary sinus, pantomogram could detect 2.0mm defect
on every internal wall of the maxillary sinus, and Waters' view could detect 3.0mm
defect on the anterior wall of the maxillary sinus.
3. On the detectability of defects for each radiographic technique, radiopaque defects
were detected in different places for each technique. Periapical radiogram could clearly
detect 0.5 §® defect on the floor of the maxillary sinus, pantomogram could detect 0.5 §®
defect on every internal wall of the maxillary sinus, and finally Waters' view could
detect 0.5 §® defect on the anterior wall of the maxillary sinus but 0.75 §® defect on the
anterior wall, lateral wall and floor of the maxillary sinus.
As the result, the periapical radiogram is the most simple and satisfactory method for
investigating in the maxillary sinus. The pantomogram is suitable method for screening
of changes in the maxillary sinus. And the Waters' view is available for detect of lesion
in the anterior wall of the maxillary sinus. For the purpose of accurate diagnosis and
evaluation of lesion in the maxillary sinus, these techniques supplement each other.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸