기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
서지반출
금인레이의 치은변연적합도에 관한 주사전자 현미경적 연구
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • 금인레이의 치은변연적합도에 관한 주사전자 현미경적 연구
저자명
박준일,권혁춘,Park. Joon-Il,Kown. Hyuk-Choon
간행물명
大韓齒科保存學會誌
권/호정보
1991년|16권 2호|pp.43-61 (19 pages)
발행정보
대한치과보존학회
파일정보
정기간행물|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

Present - day inlay casting procedures have been developed for more than 100 years and experimentation has focused on the perfect adaptation to the cavity preparation. Marginal adaptation is considered to be an important indicator of the acceptability of the cast restotration, especially on the gingival margin. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of a dissecting microscope and burnishing on vertical discrepancies, horizontal discrepancies, and cement thicknesson master die. Extracted premolars were prepared for class II gold inlays and master dies were made with conventional techniques. The experiments consisted of 4 groups. Group 1 : unaided eye, no burnishing on master die. Group 2 : unaided eye, burnishing on master die. Group 3 : microscope, no burnishing on master die. Group 4 : microscope, burnishing on master die. Cemented inlays were embedded in the hard resin and sectioned with microcutter through the gingival margins. The sectioned surfaces were polished with emery paper and finally with aluminum oxide powders. The results of the experiments were measured for vertical discrepancies, horizontal discrepancied and cement thickness under the scanning electron microscpe at the beveled gingival margin. The results of the study were summarized as follows. 1. Group 1 showed the vertical discrepancies of $81.6{mu}m({pm}48.6{mu}m)$, horizontal discrepancies of $60.1{mu}m({pm}41.1{mu}m)$, and cement thickness of $59.6{mu}m({pm}24.6{mu}m)$. 2. Group 2 showed the vertical discrepancies of $78.6{mu}m({pm}30.9{mu}m)$, horizontal discrepancies of $36.9{mu}m({pm}20.7{mu}m)$, and cement thickness of $54.0{mu}m({pm}21.6{mu}m)$. 3. Group 3 showed the vertical discrepancies of $57.5{mu}m({pm}26.4{mu}m)$, horizontal discrepancies of $28.4{mu}m({pm}17.5{mu}m)$, and cement thickness of $37.2{mu}m({pm}17.4{mu}m)$. 4. Group 4 showed the vertical discrepancies of $56.7{mu}m({pm}35.0{mu}m)$, horizontal discrepancies of $31.8{mu}m({pm}24.2{mu}m)$, and cement thickness of $45.6{mu}m({pm}19.8{mu}m)$. 5. Vertical discrepancies were not significantly different at any groups(p>.050). 6. Microscope groups(Group 3, 4) showed significantly improved horizontal marginal adaptation (p<.050). 7. Although cement thickness showed the subset of Group 3. 4, 2 and Group 4, 2, 1. Group 3 showed significantly smaller thickness than Group l(p<.050). 8. Finishing and polishing by means of a microscope produced significantly smaller discrepancies than doing so with the unaided eye(p<.050).