Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

ÇÏ¾Ç ±¸Ä¡ºÎÀ§¿¡ ½Ä¸³ÇÑ 358°³ ÀÓÇöõÆ®ÀÇ »ýÁ¸À²¿¡ ´ëÇÑ 3³â°£ ÈÄÇâÀû ¿¬±¸

Evaluation of 358 Mandibular Poster ior Implants: A 3-year Retrospective Study

±¸°­È¸º¹ÀÀ¿ë°úÇÐÁö 2010³â 26±Ç 1È£ p.59 ~ 68
À±À̱Ç, À̱â, À̵¿¿î, ÃÖÁÖ¿µ, À¯Á¤¾Æ, ¹ÚÇʱÔ, ±èÁ¤Èñ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À±À̱Ǡ( Yoon I-Kwon ) - ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø Ä¡°ú¼¾ÅÍ
À̱â ( Lee Gi ) - ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø Ä¡°ú¼¾ÅÍ
À̵¿¿î ( Lee Dong-Un ) - ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø Ä¡°ú¼¾ÅÍ
ÃÖÁÖ¿µ ( Choi Ju-Young ) - ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø Ä¡°ú¼¾ÅÍ
À¯Á¤¾Æ ( Yu Jeong-A ) - ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø Ä¡°ú¼¾ÅÍ
¹ÚÇʱԠ( Park Pil-Gyu ) - ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø Ä¡°ú¼¾ÅÍ
±èÁ¤Èñ ( Kim Jeong-Hee ) - ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø Ä¡°ú¼¾ÅÍ

Abstract

ÃÖ±Ù ¹«Ä¡¾Ç ºÎÀ§¸¦ ´ë½ÅÇÏ¿© ±¤¹üÀ§ÇÏ°Ô ½Ä¸³µÇ°í ÀÖ´Â Ä¡°ú¿ë ÀÓÇöõÆ®´Â ³ôÀº ÀÓ»ó ¼º°ø·üÀ» º¸ÀÌ°í ÀÖÀ¸³ª ½ÇÆÐ °¡´É¼ºÀº ´Ã Á¸ÀçÇϸç ÀÌ´Â ¿¹±âÄ¡ ¾ÊÀº °æ¿ì°¡ ¸¹´Ù. ÀÓÇöõÆ®ÀÇ ½ÇÆаú °ü·ÃÇÏ¿© ¿©·¯ °¡Áö ¿äÀεéÀÌ °Å·ÐµÇ°í ÀÖÀ¸³ª, ¾ÆÁ÷ ³í¶õÀÇ ¿©Áö°¡ ÀÖ´Ù. º»¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â ¼­¿ï º¸Èƺ´¿ø¿¡¼­ 2005-2006³â¿¡ ÇÏ¾Ç ±¸Ä¡ºÎÀ§¿¡ ÀÓÇöõ Æ®¸¦ ½Ä¸³ÇÑ 21¸íÀÇ È¯ÀÚ, ÃÑ 358°³ÀÇ ÀÓÇöõÆ®¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ȯÀÚÀÇ ¿¬·É, ÀÓÇöõÆ® ½Ä¸³ ºÎÀ§, ½Ã½ºÅÛ, Á÷°æ°ú ±æÀÌ, °ñÀÌ½Ä À¯¹«¿¡ µû¸¥ »ýÁ¸À²À» ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù. °¢ ¿ä¼Ò¿¡ µû¸¥ »ýÁ¸À²À» SPSS chi-square test¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ multi-variable analysis¸¦ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© °ü·Ã¼ºÀ» °ËÁõÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¿¬±¸ °á°ú 3³â°£ 98.3% ÀÇ ´©Àû »ýÁ¸À²À» º¸¿´À¸¸ç, Á¶»çÇÑ ¿äÀÎ Áß ÀÓÇöõÆ® Á÷°æ¸¸ÀÌ ÀÓÇöõÆ® »ýÁ¸À²°ú °ü·Ã¼ºÀÌ ÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ÀÌ´Â ³ÐÀº Á÷°æÀÇ ÀÓÇöõÆ®°¡ ÁÖ·Î ´ëü(rescue) ÀÓÇöõÆ® ȤÀº °ñÁúÀÌ ÁÁÁö ¾ÊÀº ºÎÀ§¿¡ »ç¿ëµÇ´Â °æ¿ì°¡ ¸¹Àº °ÍÀÌ ¿øÀÎÀ¸·Î ÀÛ¿ëÇÑ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù. ÇâÈÄ ÀÓÇöõÆ®ÀÇ ¼º°ø°ú °ü·ÃÇÏ¿© ¸íÈ®ÇÑ ÁöÇ¥¸¦ Á¦°øÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â Áö¼ÓÀûÀÎ ¿¬±¸°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÒ °ÍÀÌ´Ù.

Recently, dental implants extensively inserted on edentulous area show highly clinical success rate. However, clinicians cannot exclude the possibility of failure and it often unexpectively occures. Many possible factors associated with failure of dental implants have been reported but controversy exists over the extent to them. In this study, we collected 212 patients who had been inserted 358 dental implants on mandibular premolar and molar area from 2005 to 2006. The survival rate of fixtures was recorded according to age of patients, implantation site, implant system, diameter and length of fixtures. Multi-variable analysis using SPSS chi-square test was operated to verify relation of each factors and survival rates. Accumulative survival rate was 98.3% for 3 years. Only diameter of fixtures was related to the implant survival rate. This may be thought that wider fixtures had been chosen to rescue implants or used in sites of poor bone quality. Further continuous study will be needed for direct guidance associated with survival rate of implants.

Å°¿öµå

»ýÁ¸À²;½ÇÆпäÀÎ;ÀÓÇöõÆ®;Á÷°æ;ÇϾDZ¸Ä¡ºÎ
dental implant;failure factor;implant diameter;mandibular posterior tooth;survival rate

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI