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
처리 방법이 다른 표면이 임플랜트의 골유착 및 안정성에 미치는 영향
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • 처리 방법이 다른 표면이 임플랜트의 골유착 및 안정성에 미치는 영향
  • THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SURFACE TREATMENT ON THE OSSEOINTEGRATION AND STABILITY OF IMPLANTS
저자명
양성욱,임헌송,조인호,Yang. Seoung-Wook,Lim. Heon-Song,Cho. In-Ho
간행물명
대한치과보철학회지
권/호정보
2006년|44권 5호|pp.606-616 (11 pages)
발행정보
대한치과보철학회
파일정보
정기간행물|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

Purpose: This experiment examined the effect of different surface treatment on the osseointegration and stability of implants. Material and methods: In this study, 40 each of machined, SLA and RBM implants, which are the most commonly used implants, were implanted into the tibia of 20 normal rabbits using $OsseoCare^{TM}$. The rabbits were sacrificed after 1 week, 4 weeks, 8 weeks and 12 weeks for implant stability analysis, removal torque analysis, histologic and histomorphometric analysis. Result : ISQ showed significant difference between Machined and RBM at first week and at 4 weeks. There was significant difference between Machined and both SLA and RBM(p<0.05) but after 8 weeks there were no significant difference between each group. In the removal torque, RBM showd significantly higher values than SLA and Machined surface at 1st week. At 4th and 12th week, there was significant difference between Machined and SLA, RBM(p<0.05). In the bone to implant contact variable, there was no significant difference between each surface treatment method. In the Machined surface group, there was no significant difference between each time interval. but in SLA group, there were significant differences between the 1st week and 12th week and in RBM group, there were significant differences between the 1st week and 8th, 12th week and between 4th and 12th week(p<0.05). The bone area showed significantly higher values in SLA and RBM compared to Machined surface 1st and 8th week and significantly higher values in SLA than Machined surface at the 4th week(p<0.05). Conclusion: The roughened surface of implants showed positive effect in the early stages of implantation and assisted in bone formation After the bone formation stage, there was no statistical difference between Machined and roughened surface groups. In dental implantation, where initial stability is critical to the success of implants, the use of roughened surface implants should assist in reducing the healing period after implantation.