Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

»ó¿ëÈ­µÈ Ä¡°ú¿ë ÀÓÇöõÆ®ÀÇ µÚƲ¸² Á¦°Å·Â ¹× Á¶Á÷ÇÐÀû ºÐ¼® ¿¬±¸: °¡Åä °æ°ñ¿¡¼­ÀÇ ¿¬±¸

Removal Torque and Histomorphometric Investigation of Surface Modified Commercial Implants: An Experimental Study in the Rabbit Tibia

¹ÚÁ¾Çö, ±è´ë°ï, Á¶¸®¶ó, ¹ÚÂùÁø,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¹ÚÁ¾Çö ( Park Jong-Hyun ) - °­¸ª´ëÇб³
±è´ë°ï ( Kim Dae-Gon ) - °­¸ª´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
Á¶¸®¶ó ( Cho Lee-Ra ) - °­¸ª´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
¹ÚÂùÁø ( Park Chan-Jin ) - °­¸ª´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç

Abstract

»ó¿ë ÀÓÇöõÆ®ÀÇ Ç¥¸éÀ» °³ÁúÇϱâ À§ÇØ ¹°¸®Àû, È­ÇÐÀû ¹æ¹ýÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ »õ·Î¿î Ç¥¸éÀÌ Áõ°¡ÇÏ°í ÀÖÀ¸¸ç ÀÌ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °ñ¹ÝÀÀµµ ´Ù¸¦ °ÍÀ¸·Î ¿¹»óÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÁö¸¸ ´ëºÎºÐÀÇ ¿¬±¸´Â ´Ü¼øÈ÷ ±â°èÀý»èÇü ÀÓÇöõÆ®¿ÍÀÇ ºñ±³¸¸À» ÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â 4Á¾ÀÇ ´Ù¸¥ °³ÁúµÈ Ç¥¸éÀ» °¡Áø »ó¿ë ÀÓÇöõÆ®¸¦ °¡ÅäÀÇ °æ°ñ¿¡ ½Ä¸³ÇÑ ÈÄ »ý¿ªÇÐÀû, Á¶Á÷ÇüÅÂÇÐÀûÀ¸·Î ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¿¬±¸ °á°ú, ¸ðµç ÀÓÇöõÆ®´Â 6ÁÖ ÈÄ ¾ÈÁ¤ÀûÀÎ °ñÀ¯ÂøÀ» ÀÌ·ç°í ÀÖ¾úÀ¸¸ç 4Á¾ÀÇ Ç¥¸é°³ÁúÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ °øÁøÁÖÆļö ¹× Á¶Á÷ÇüÅÂÇÐÀû °ñ¹ÝÀÀÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ´Â ¾ø¾úÀ¸¸ç Ç¥¸é°³ÁúÀ» ºñ±³Çϱâ À§ÇØ ÇÇÁú°ñ ÇϹæÀ¸·Î Áõ½ÄÇÑ °ñÀ» ºñ±³ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ À¯¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. »ý¿ªÇÐÀû, Á¶Á÷ÇüÅÂÇÐÀû °ñ¹ÝÀÀ¿¡ ºñÇØ ¹Ì¼¼´ÜÃþÃÔ¿µ(micro-CT)¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ´Â ºñ±³¹ýÀº À¯¿ë¼º°ú Á¤È®µµ°¡ ³·Àº °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.

The methods of surface modification of commercial implants were various according to the manufacturer. Surface modification of implant may produce diverse physical and chemical surface characteristics resulted from the treatment method and treatment condition. As a result, the bone response might be different. Even though surface modified implants have been used clinically, most researches are focusing on the bone response of surface modified implants comparing to machined implants rather than surface modified commercial implants. This study compare and analyze bone responses of 4 surface modified commercial implants with different shapes and surfaces. Eighty surface modified commercial implants with 4 different surface characteristics were installed in the tibia of white Newzealand rabbits. Biomechanical stability tests and histomorphometric evaluation were done. The results were as follows: 1. Surface modified commercial implants showed stable osseointegration at 6 weeks after installation. 2. Histomorphometric evaluation showed that there was no significant differences in bone to implant contact among 4 different commercial titanium implants. In comparing the implants with different shape the measurement of bone growth in subcortical area would be more reliable than entire bone to implant contact length. 3. Resonance Frequency Analysis showed that there was no significant differences among 4 types of implants, even though they were significantly different in installation. 4. There was significant differences in interfacial shear strength among 4 type of implants. 5. It is difficult to observe accurate bone to implant interface using Micro-CT. However, it is possible to measure the entire contact length of the implant to the bone.

Å°¿öµå

histomorphometric evaluation;interfacial shear strength;Micro-CT;Resonance Frequency Analysis;surface modified commercial implant

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI