# 수종 임플랜트의 표면 거칠기와 초기안정성에 관한 연구

• Cho, Dong-Hoon (Dept. of Prosthodontics Graduate School Dankook University) ;
• Lim, Ju-Hwan (Dept. of Prosthodontics Graduate School Dankook University)
• 조동훈 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
• 임주환 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실)
• Published : 2000.09.30

#### Abstract

Surface roughness is one of implant surface topography and it's found that surface roughness characterizations, such as surface energy, oxide layer thickness and its chemical composition, are closely correlated if the roughness is changed. Several studies showed the importance of analyzing surface structure so the surface structure of thread implant was analyzed to measure the implant quality exactly. In this study, surface roughness of 4 implants - MK $II^{(R)}$(Nobel Biocare), $RBM^{(R)}$(Life-Core, USA), $Osseotite^{(R)}$(3i, USA), $TPS^{(R)}$(Life-Core, USA) - were measured using $Accura^{(R)}$ and 40 implants were installed into 4 sets of ten bovine ribs based on the parameters from the measurements. From this test, the following conclusions for the initial stability were drawn by measuring and comparing RFA, Periotest Value (PTV), Removal Torgue Value (RTV). 1. $R_a$ value in surface roughness measurement was increasing by the order of $MKII^{(R)}$, $Osseotite^{(R)}$, $RBM^{(R)}$, $TPS^{(R)}$ and $R_q$ value was the same order. 2. $R_q$ value in each section was observed to increase by the order of $MKII^{(R)}$, $Osseotite^{(R)}$, $RBM^{(R)}$, $TPS^{(R)}$ in top and $MKII^{(R)}$, $RBM^{(R)}$, $Osseotite^{(R)}$, $TPS^{(R)}$ in mid-section but the value of $MKII^{(R)}$ bottom was the lowest, followed by $Osseotite^{(R)}$, $RBM^{(R)}$ and $TPS^{(R)}$. 3. RFA increased by the order of $RBM^{(R)}$(7042Hz), $MKII^{(R)}$(7047Hz), $Osseotite^{(R)}$(7076Hz), $TPS^{(R)}$(7168Hz) and there was no significance between each group. 4. PTV was increasing by the order of $MKII^{(R)}$(-1.62), $TPS^{(R)}$(-1.92), $Osseotite^{(R)}$ & $RBM^{(R)}$(-2.08) and there was no significance, either. 5. Removal torque in RTV measurement showed the increasing order of $MKII^{(R)}(5.31kgf{\cdot}cm)$, $Oeeotite^{(R)}(5.71kgf{\cdot}cm)$, $TPS^{(R)}(5.92kgf{\cdot}cm)$ and $RBM^{(R)}(7.24kgf{\cdot}cm)$ and there was no significance among groups. Above observations explains that surface roughness does not make any impact on the initial stability of implants installation.