Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

°æµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µ ¹× Polytome-U ÃÔ¿µ¿¡¼­ÀÇ ÇϾǰúµÎÀ§ ºñ±³

Comparison of Condylar Position in Transcranial Radiography and Polytomography from Polytome-U

Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼± 1998³â 28±Ç 2È£ p.329 ~ 338
³ª°æ¼ö, Á¶ºÀÇý,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
³ª°æ¼ö (  ) - ºÎ»ê´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°ú¹æ»ç¼±ÇÐ
Á¶ºÀÇý (  ) - ºÎ»ê´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¹æ»ç¼±ÇÐ

Abstract

ÃøµÎÇϾǰüÀýÁõÀÇ Áõ»óÀ» º¸À̴ ȯÀÚ 65¸í 130°³ÀÇ ÃøµÎÇϾǰüÀýÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î
Polytome-Y¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ ´ÙÃà´ÜÃþÃÔ¿µ ¹× °æµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µÀ» ½Ç½ÃÇÏ¿© °¢°¢¿¡¼­ ÇϾǰúµÎÀÇ °üÀý
¿Í³»¿¡¼­ÀÇ À§Ä¡ ¹× ÇüŸ¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á°ú¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1. ¿¬±¸´ë»ó 65¸í¿¡¼­ °¡Àå ¸¹Àº ºÐÆ÷¸¦ º¸ÀÎ ¿¬·ÉÀº 10´ë·Î¼­ 18¸í (277%) À̾úÀ¸¸ç ´Ù
À½ÀÌ 20´ë ¹× 30´ë·Î¼­ 12¸í(18.5%)¾¿ °°Àº ºÐÆ÷¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù. ¼ºº°ºÐÆ÷´Â ¿©¼º¿¡¼­ ¾ÐµµÀûÀ¸
·Î ¸¹¾Æ¼­ 57¸íÀ¸·Î ÀüüÀÇ 87.7%¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù.
2 ´ÙÃà´ÜÃþÃÔ¿µ»ó¿¡¼­ ÃøµÎÇϾǰüÀý³»¿¡¼­ ÇϾǰúµÎÀÇ À§Ä¡°¡ ¿ÜÃø, Áß¾Ó ¹× ³»Ãø¿¡ °ÉÃÄ
º¯ÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´ø °ÍÀº 64 °üÀý(49.2%)À̾úÀ¸¸ç ÀÌ Áß °æµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µ ¿µ»ó¿¡¼­ÀÇ À§Ä¡¿Í ÀÏÄ¡¸¦
º¸ÀÎ °ÍÀº 39 °üÀý(30.0%)À̾ú´Ù. À§Ä¡ÀÇ º¯È­¸¦ º¸¿´´ø 66 °üÀý(50.8%) Áß¿¡¼­´Â ¿ÜÃø ¹×
Áß¾ÓÀÇ ´ÜÃþ¸é°ú °æµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µÀåÀÇ À§Ä¡°¡ ÀÏÄ¡¸¦ º¸¿´´ø °ÍÀº 48 °üÀý(36.9%)À̾ú°í ´ÙÃà´Ü
ÃþÃÔ¿µ ¿µ»ó¿¡¼­ÀÇ À§Ä¡¿Í °æµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µ ¿µ»ó¿¡¼­ÀÇ À§Ä¡°¡ ºÒÀÏÄ¡¸¦ º¸¿´´ø °ÍÀº 41 °üÀý
(31.5%)À̾ú´Ù.
3. ÇϾǰúµÎÀ§¸¦ Àü¹æ, Áß¾Ó ¹× ÈĹæÀ§·Î ºÐ·ùÇßÀ» ¶§ °¡Àå ¸¹Àº °ÍÀº ÈĹæÀ§ ¿´´Âµ¥ °æµÎ
°³ÃÔ¿µ¿¡¼­´Â 42.3% ¿´°í ´ÙÃà´ÜÃþÃÔ¿µ¿¡¼­´Â ¿ÜÃø Áß¾Ó ¹× ³»Ãø¿¡¼­ °¢°¢ 42.3%,49.2% ¹×
38.5% ¿´´Ù.
4.´ÙÃà´ÜÃþÃÔ¿µ¿¡¼­ ÃøµÎÇϾǰüÀý³»¿¡¼­ ÇÏ¾Ç °úµÎÀÇ ÇüÅ°¡ ¿ÜÃø, Áß¾Ó ¹× ³»Ãø¿¡ °ÉÃÄ
º¯ÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´ø °ÍÀº 84 °üÀý(64.6%)À̾úÀ¸¸ç ÀÌ Áß °æµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µ ¿µ»ó¿¡¼­¿Í ÀÏÄ¡¸¦ º¸ÀÎ °Í
Àº 74 °üÀý(56.9%)À̾ú´Ù. ÇüÅÂÀÇ º¯È­¸¦ º¸¿´´ø 46 °üÀý(35.4%) Áß¿¡¼­´Â ¿ÜÃø ¹× Áß¾ÓÀÇ
´ÜÃþ¸é°ú °æµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µ ¿µ»óÀÌ ÀÏÄ¡¸¦ º¸¿´´ø °ÍÀº 40 °üÀý(30.1%)À̾ú°í ´ÙÃà´ÜÃþÃÔ¿µ ¿µ»ó
¿¡¼­ÀÇ ÇüÅ¿ͰæµÎ°³ÃÔ¿µ ¿µ»ó¿¡¼­ÀÇ ÇüÅ°¡ ºÒÀÏÄ¡¸¦ º¸¿´´ø °ÍÀº 13 °üÀý(10.0%)À̾ú´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
The authors examined the condylar position and shape of condylar process from the
transcranial radiographs and polytomographs of the 130 temporomandibular joints of 65
patients who complained symptms of temporomandibular disorder and the following were
obtained ;
1. The age and sex distribution of the 65 patients showed peak incidence in and
decade (27.7%) followed by 3rd (18.5%) and 4th decade (18.5%) and female
predominance (87.7%) .
2. In polytomography 64 joints (49.2%) showed consistent condylar position from
lateral to medial and 39 joints (30.0%) of them showed agreement with those of
transcranial radiographs. Among the 66 joints (50.8%) which showed changes in
condylar position,48 joints (36.9%) showed agreement with lateral and central
tomographic and transcranial radiographic position. 41 joints (31.5%) showed
disagreement in condylar position between the polytomographic and transcranial
radiographic images.
3. When the condylar position was classified as anterior, central and posterior, the
porterior prosition was the most frequent position, that is ,42.3% of the transcranial
radiography and 42.3% ,49.2% and 38.5% of the lateral, central and medial
polytomographic radiographs.
4. In polytomography 84 joints (64.6%) showed consistent condylar shape from lateral
to medial and 74 joints (56.9%) of them showed agreement with those of transcranial
radiographs Among the 46 joints (35.4%) which showed changes in condylar shape, 40
joints (30.1%) showed agreement with lateral and central tomographic and transcranial
radiographic shape. 41 joints (31.5%) showed disagreement in condylar shape between
the polytomographic and transcranical radiographic images.

Å°¿öµå

temporamandibular joint; transcranial radiography;

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸