Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

3D ÇÁ¸°ÆÃÀ¸·Î Á¦ÀÛµÈ ¿©·¯ Á¾·ùÀÇ ·¹Áøºê¸´ÁöÀÇ ±¼°î°­µµ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¿¬±¸

Flexural strength of various kinds of the resin bridges fabricated with 3D printing

±¸°­È¸º¹ÀÀ¿ë°úÇÐÁö 2017³â 33±Ç 4È£ p.260 ~ 268
¹Ú»ó¸ð, ±è¼º±Õ, ¹ÚÁö¸¸, ±èÀåÇö, ÀüÀ±ÅÂ, °ûÀ翵,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¹Ú»ó¸ð ( Park Sang-Mo ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çаú
±è¼º±Õ ( Kim Seong-Kyun ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çаú
¹ÚÁö¸¸ ( Park Ji-Man ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çаú
±èÀåÇö ( Kim Jang-Hyun ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çаú
ÀüÀ±Å ( Jeon Yoon-Tae ) - (ÁÖ)¾Ö°æÈ­ÇÐ
°ûÀ翵 ( Koak Jai-Young ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çаú

Abstract

¸ñÀû: Ä¡°ú º¸Ã¶¹°À» ÀûÃþ °¡°ø ±â¼ú·Î Á¦ÀÛÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº ¸¹Àº ÀÌÁ¡ÀÌ ÀÖÀ¸³ª ¾ÆÁ÷±îÁö ¿¬±¸ °á°ú ºÎÁ·À¸·Î ÀÎÇÏ¿© ÀÓ»ó¿¡ ¼­ ³Î¸® Àû¿ëµÇ°í ÀÖÁö ¸øÇÏ´Â ½ÇÁ¤ÀÌ´Ù. ÀÌ ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â µðÁöÅÐ ±¤ÇÐ ±â¼ú ¹æ½ÄÀÇ ÀûÃþ °¡°ø ±â¼úÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© Á¦ÀÛÇÑ Ä¡°ú º¸Ã¶¹°¿¡ À־ Àç·á¿¡ µû¶ó ±¼°î°­µµ¿¡ À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ÀÖ´ÂÁö ¿¬±¸Çϱâ·Î ÇÑ´Ù.

¿¬±¸ Àç·á ¹× ¹æ¹ý: 3À¯´Ö °íÁ¤¼ºº¸Ã¶ ÇüÅÂÀÇ ½ÃÆí Á¦ÀÛÀ» À§ÇÑ ±Ý¼Ó Áö±×¸¦ Á¦ÀÛÇÏ¿´´Ù. Áö±×¿¡ ¸Â°Ô ½ÃÆíÀ» µðÀÚÀÎÇÏ¿´´Ù. µðÀÚÀÎ ÇÑ ½ÃÆí¿¡ ´ëÇÏ¿© NC, DP-1, DT-1ÀÇ ¼¼ °¡Áö Àç·á·Î µðÁöÅÐ ±¤ÇÐ ±â¼ú ¹æ½ÄÀÇ Ãâ·ÂÀ» ÇÏ¿´´Ù. °¢ Àç·á¸¶´Ù 5°³ÀÇ ½ÃÆíÀ» Á¦ÀÛÇ쵂 Ãâ·Â °¢µµ¸¦ ¼öÆò¸é¿¡ 30¡Æ·Î ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ½ÃÆíÀ» Áö±× À§¿¡ ¾ÈÂø½ÃÅ°°í ¸¸´É½ÃÇè±â·Î ±¼°î°­µµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ°í ±â·ÏÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±â·ÏÇÑ µ¥ÀÌÅÍ´Â SPSS »ó¿¡¼­ ÀÏ¿ø¹èÄ¡ºÐ»êºÐ¼®¹ýÀ» ÅëÇÏ¿© Àç·á¿¡ µû¸¥ ÆÄÀý °­µµ Â÷ÀÌÀÇ À¯ÀǼºÀ» Á¶»çÇÏ¿´´Ù. »çÈÄ °ËÁ¤(Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test)Àº ±×·ì °£ÀÇ Åë°èÀû Â÷À̸¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© ½ÃÇàµÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç Åë°èÀû À¯ÀǼöÁØÀº 0.05·Î ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: °¢ ±ºµéÀÇ ±¼°î°­µµ´Â NC±ºÀº 1119 ¡¾ 305 N·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ°í DP-1±ºÀº 619 ¡¾ 150 N, DT-1±ºÀº 413 ¡¾ 65 N·Î ÃøÁ¤µÇ¾ú´Ù. SPSS¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÑ ÀÏ¿ø¹èÄ¡ºÐ»êºÐ¼®¹ý ¹× Tukey HSD¿¡¼­´Â NC¿Í DP-1, NC¿Í DT-1»çÀÌ¿¡ À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷À̸¦ º¸¿´À¸¸ç(P < 0.05), DP-1°ú DT-1»çÀÌ¿¡´Â À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷À̸¦ º¸ÀÌÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù(P > 0.05).

°á·Ð: µðÁöÅÐ ±¤ÇÐ ±â¼ú ¹æ½ÄÀ¸·Î 3DÇÁ¸°ÆÃÀ» ÇÏ¿© Á¦ÀÛÇÑ 3À¯´Ö °íÁ¤¼º º¸Ã¶ ÇüÅÂÀÇ ·¹Áø º¸Ã¶¹°¿¡ À־ ¸ÞŸũ¸±»ê ¿¡½ºÅÚ Àç·á°¡ ³ôÀº ±¼°î°­µµ¸¦ º¸¿©ÁÖ¾ú´Ù.

Purpose: Manufacturing with AM (Additive manufacturing) technique has many advantages; but, due to insufficient study in the area, it is not being widely used in the general clinic. In this study, differences of flexural strength among various materials of 3 unit fixed dental prosthesis were analyzed.

Materials and Methods: A metal jig for specimens that had a 3-unit-fixed dental prosthesis figure were fabricated. The jigs were made appropriately to the specifications of the specimens. Three different kinds of materials of specimens which were NC (mathacrylic esther based) , DP-1 (Bisphenol A epoxy acrylate type oligomer based), and DT-1 (urethane acrylate based) were printed with DLP machine. Five specimens for each kind of material were printed with an angle of 30¡Æ from the horizontal surface. The specimens were placed on the jig and the flexural strength was measured and recorded using Universal testing machine. The recorded data was analyzed in SPSS using One-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD to determine the significance of the differences of flexural strength among the groups.

Results: The flexural strengths of each group were the followings: NC, 1119 ¡¾ 305 N; DP-1, 619 ¡¾ 150 N; DT-1, 413 ¡¾ 65 N. Using One-way ANOVA and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test, significant difference was found between NC and the other groups (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between DP-1 and DT-1 (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: Higher flexural strength was shown in 3-unit-fixed dental prosthesis that were 3D printed using a DLP machine with NC material.

Å°¿öµå

3D ÇÁ¸°Æ®; ±¼°î°­µµ; µðÁöÅÐ ¶óÀÌÆ® ÇÁ·Î¼¼½Ì ÇÁ¸°ÅÍ; 3À¯´Ö °íÁ¤¼º º¸Ã¶; ÀûÃþ°¡°ø
3D print; flexural strength; digital light-processing printer; 3 unit-fixed dental prosthesis; additive manufacturing

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI