6 research outputs found

    CXCR-4 ์ฐจ๋‹จ์ด ๊ตฌ๊ฐ• ํŽธํ‰์„ธํฌ์•”์ข… ์„ธํฌ์ฃผ์˜ ์ฆ์‹๊ณผ ์ด๋™์— ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์˜ํ–ฅ

    No full text
    Thesis(doctor`s)--์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› :์น˜์˜ํ•™๊ณผ ๊ตฌ๊ฐ•๋ณ‘๋ฆฌํ•™ ์ „๊ณต,2007.Docto

    ๋ฌธ์„œ ์ˆ˜์ค€ ๊ด€๊ณ„ ์˜ˆ์ธก์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ์„ค๋ช… ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•œ ์ฆ๊ฑฐ ์ถ”์ถœ ๋ชจ๋ธ

    No full text
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(์„์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๊ณต๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์ „๊ธฐยท์ •๋ณด๊ณตํ•™๋ถ€, 2022.2. ์ •๊ต๋ฏผ.The relation extraction (RE) task aims to identify semantic relations between entities from text. This task has recently taken attention as it can be applied to information retrieval-related applications, including question answering or knowledge graph completion. Document-level RE task challenges the existing work for sentence-level RE which finds relation within a single sentence, as it requires the model to capture information across the sentences and identify the relevant and redundant context. In this paper, we present the Evidence Retrieval for Relation Extraction (ER4RE) model that promotes the interpretability of the model prediction. ER4RE consists of an evidence retriever and a relation predictor, which work sequentially. First, the evidence retriever identifies the supporting sentences and computes the context representation for a given query. Then, the relation predictor takes the context information to infer the relations. We demonstrate that ER4RE achieves a significant performance improvement with oracle evidence sentences, which implies that if the model identifies supporting evidence for a given query, it can easily predict the relations.๋ณธ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์—์„œ๋Š” ๋Œ€์šฉ๋Ÿ‰ ์‚ฌ์ „ํ•™์Šต ์–ธ์–ด ๋ชจ๋ธ์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ์—ฌ๋Ÿฌ ๋ฌธ์žฅ์œผ๋กœ ๊ตฌ์„ฑ๋œ ๋ฌธ์„œ์—์„œ ์–ธ๊ธ‰๋œ ๋‘ ๊ฐœ์ฒด๊ฐ„์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š”, ๋ฌธ์„œ ๋‹จ์œ„ ๊ด€๊ณ„ ์˜ˆ์ธก ๋ฌธ์ œ๋ฅผ ๋‹ค๋ฃจ๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ฌธ์ œ๋Š” ๋ฌธ์„œ ์•ˆ์— ๋‹ค์ˆ˜์˜ ๊ฐœ์ฒด๊ฐ€ ์กด์žฌํ•˜๊ณ , ๋‘ ๊ฐœ์ฒด๊ฐ€ ์„œ๋กœ ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ๋ฌธ์žฅ์— ์œ„์น˜ํ•˜๋ฉฐ ํ•˜๋‚˜์˜ ๊ฐœ์ฒด๋ฅผ ์ง€์นญํ•˜๋Š” ์—ฌ๋ ค ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋‹จ์–ด๊ฐ€ ์กด์žฌํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ์ ์—์„œ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ๋‹จ์œ„ ๊ด€๊ณ„ ์˜ˆ์ธก ๋ฌธ์ œ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋‚œ์ด๋„๊ฐ€ ๋†’๋‹ค. ์ข…๋ž˜ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ๋™์ผํ•œ ๊ฐœ์ฒด๋ฅผ ๊ฐ€๋ฅดํ‚ค๋Š” ๋‹จ์–ด ๋“ค์˜ ์ง‘ํ•ฉ ์ •๋ณด๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„ ์ธ๊ณต์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๊ฑฐ๋‚˜ ๋ฌธ์„œ์˜ ๊ณ„์ธต ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฅผ ๋ฐ˜์˜ํ•œ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ๋‹ค์ˆ˜ ์ œ์•ˆ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ œ์‹œ๋œ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๋“ค์€ ๋ฌธ์„œ ๋‹จ์œ„ ๊ด€๊ณ„ ์˜ˆ์ธก์—์„œ F1 ์ ์ˆ˜ ๊ฐ€ ๋†’์ด๋Š” ์„ฑ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ฃผ์—ˆ์ง€๋งŒ ๋‘ ๊ฐœ์ฒด์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์˜ˆ์ธก์„ ์„ค๋ช…ํ•˜์ง€๋Š” ๋ชปํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ฌธ์ œ์—์„œ ๊ด€๊ณ„ ๋ฟ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๋’ท๋ฐ›์นจํ•˜๋Š” ์ฆ๊ฑฐ ๋ฌธ์žฅ๋„ ์ถ”์ถœํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋‘ ๊ฐœ์ฒด๊ฐ€ ์ฃผ์–ด์งˆ ๋•Œ ๊ฐœ์ฒด๊ฐ„์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ์„ค๋ช…ํ•˜๋Š” ์ฆ๊ฑฐ๊ฐ€ ๋  ํ™•๋ฅ ์„ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ๋ณ„๋กœ ๊ณ„์‚ฐํ•˜๊ณ  ์ด๋ฅผ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋กœ ์ง„ํ–‰ ๋œ๋‹ค. ๊ฐ ๋ฌธ์žฅ์ด ์ฆ๊ฑฐ ๋ฌธ์žฅ์ด ๋  ํ™•๋ฅ ์„ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์กฐ๊ฑด์œผ๋กœ ์„ค์ •ํ•˜๊ณ  ์‹คํ—˜์„ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ ๋ชจ๋ธ์—์„œ ์ฆ๊ฑฐ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ์ถ”์ถœ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ๊ณผ ๋ฌธ์„œ ๋‹จ์œ„ ๊ด€๊ณ„ ์˜ˆ์ธก ์ตœ์ข… ์„ฑ๋Šฅ์ด ๋น„ ๋ก€ํ•˜๊ณ  ์ฆ๊ฑฐ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ์ถ”์ถœ์ด ๋ณ‘๋ชฉ ์ง€์ ์ธ ๊ฒƒ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ฐ˜๋ฉด ์ œ์‹œํ•œ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์—์„œ๋Š” ์ฃผ์–ด์ง€๋Š” ๊ฐœ์ฒด ์Œ๊ณผ ๋ฌด๊ด€ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ํ•œ๋ฒˆ์— ๋ฌธ์„œ์˜ ๋ฌธ์žฅ๋“ค์„ ์ธ์ฝ”๋”ฉ์„ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์ด๋Š” ๋ฌธ์žฅ ์ž„๋ฒ ๋”ฉ์˜ ํ‘œํ˜„๋ ฅ์— ์ œํ•œ์„ ์ฃผ๊ฒŒ ๋œ๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ์ฃผ์–ด์ง€๋Š” ๊ฐœ์ฒด ์Œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ฐ ๋ฌธ์žฅ ์ž„๋ฒ ๋”ฉ์˜ ํ‘œํ˜„๋ ฅ ๊ฐœ์„  ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์„ ์—ฐ๊ตฌํ•  ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค.1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 METHODOLOGY 4 2.1 Task Formulation 4 2.2 Evidence retriever 5 2.3 Relation predictor 5 2.4 Training Regime 6 3 EXPERIMENTS 8 3.1 Dataset 8 3.2 Implementation details 8 3.3 Results 9 3.3.1 Relation Extraction 9 3.3.2 Evidence Retrieval 11 4 CONCLUSION 13์„

    Sensitivity of different testing method in the cytotoxicity of the root canal sealers

    No full text
    ์น˜์˜ํ•™๊ณผ/๋ฐ•์‚ฌ[ํ•œ๊ธ€] ์น˜๊ณผ ์žฌ๋ฃŒ์˜ ์ƒ๋ฌผํ•™์  ์„ฑ์งˆ์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•˜๋Š” ์ƒ์ฒด์˜ ์‹คํ—˜๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์ค‘ ์„ธํฌ๋ฐฐ์–‘์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ๊ฒ€์‚ฌ๋Š” ๊ฐ๊ด€์  ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•˜๋ฉฐ ๋ฐ˜์‘์ด ๋น ๋ฅด๊ณ  ์žฌํ˜„์ด ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•˜๋‹ค๋Š” ๋“ฑ์˜ ์žฅ์ ์„ ์ง€๋‹ˆ๊ณ  ์žˆ์–ด, ์ƒ๋ฌผํ•™์  ์„ฑ์งˆ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐ 1์ฐจ์  ๋…์„ฑ๊ฒ€์‚ฌ๋กœ์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ ์—ฌ๋Ÿฌ๊ฐ€์ง€ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์ด ์†Œ๊ฐœ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์— ์ €์ž๋Š” ์„ธํฌ๋ฐฐ์–‘์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ๊ฒ€์‚ฌ์˜ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์— ๋”ฐ๋ฅธ ๊ฐ์‘๋„๋ฅผ ๋น„๊ต, ๊ด€์ฐฐํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•˜์—ฌ 4์ข…์˜ ๊ทผ๊ด€์ถฉ์ „์šฉ sealer๋ฅผ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ฅ์˜ ํ”ผํ•˜์กฐ์ง์—์„œ ๋ถ„๋ฆฌ, ๋ฐฐ์–‘ํ•œ ์„ฌ์œ ์•„์„ธํฌ์ธ L929 ์„ธํฌ๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•ด์„œ ํ•œ์ฒœํ‰ํŒ๋ฒ•์œผ๋กœ neutral red ์ƒ์ฒด์—ผ์ƒ‰์— ์˜ํ•œ ์„ธํฌ์•… ํˆฌ๊ณผ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , methyl thiazole tetrazolium bromide (MTT)๊ฒ€์ •๋ฒ•์œผ๋กœ mitochondria๋‚ด succinate dehydrogenase์˜ ํ™œ์„ฑ๋„๋ฅผ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ,neutral red ๊ฒ€์ •๋ฒ•์œผ๋กœ lysosome์˜ ์—ผ์ƒ‰์•ก ํก์ˆ˜๋Ÿ‰์˜ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋•Œ ๊ฐ ์žฌ๋ฃŒ์˜ ํ˜ผํ•ฉ ํ›„ ์‹œ๊ฐ„๊ฒฝ๊ณผ์— ๋”ฐ๋ฅธ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•˜์—ฌ ํ™‰ํ•ฉ ์งํ›„, 24์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋ฐ 72์‹œ๊ฐ„ ํ›„ ์„ธํฌ์™€ ๋ฐ˜์‘์‹œ์ผœ ๊ด€์ฐฐํ•˜์—ฌ ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์–ป์—ˆ๋‹ค. 1. ํ•œ์ฒœํ‰ํŒ๋ฒ•์„ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ ๊ฒ€์‚ฌ์—์„œ N0genol๊ณผ Sealapex๋Š” ์ค‘๋“ฑ๋„์˜ ์„ธํฌ ๋…์„ฑ์„, AH26๊ณผ Tubli-seal์€ ๋ฏธ์•ฝํ•œ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, Sealapex๋ฅผ ์ œ์™ธํ•œ 3์ข…์˜ ์ œํ’ˆ์—์„œ๋Š” ํ˜ผํ•ฉ ํ›„ ์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ๊ฒฝ๊ณผํ• ์ˆ˜๋ก ๋…์„ฑ์ด ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์—ˆ๋‹ค. 2. MTT ๊ฒ€์ •๋ฒ•์—์„œ AH26์€ ์‹ฌํ•œ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์„, Sealapex์™€ Tubli-seal์€ ์ค‘๋“ฑ๋„์˜ ์„ธํฌ ๋…์„ฑ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์—ˆ๊ณ  NOgenol์€ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค. 3. MTT ๊ฒ€์ •๋ฒ•์—์„œ ๋ฐฐ์–‘์ด ๊ณ„์†๋จ์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์ด ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, AH26๊ณผ Sealapex๋Š” ํ”ํ•จํ›„ ์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ๊ฒฝ๊ณผํ• ์ˆ˜๋ฅต ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์„ ๋” ํฌ๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์—ˆ๋‹ค. 4. Neutral red ๊ฒ€์ •๋ฒ•์—์„œ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ์—๋Š” ๋ชจ๋“  ์‹œํ—˜๊ตฐ์ด .์ค‘๋“ฑ๋„์˜ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋ฐฐ์–‘์ด ๊ณ„์†๋จ์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ํ˜ผํ•ฉํ›„ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์‹œ๊ฐ„์— ๊ด€๊ณ„์—†์ด ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์ด ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์„ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ด์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์ƒ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋กœ ํ•œ์ฒœํ‰ํŒ๋ฒ•๊ณผ MTT ๊ฒ€์ •๋ฒ•์—์„œ๋Š” ์„ธํฌ์™€ sealer์˜ ์ ‘์ด‰๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ๋™์ผ์ œํ’ˆ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์„ธํฌ๊ฐ์‘๋„๊ฐ€ ์ƒ์ดํ•˜๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ์œผ๋‚˜, ์ƒ์ฒด๋‚ด ์กฐ๊ฑด๊ณผ ๋น„์Šทํ•˜๋„๋ก ๊ณ ์•ˆํ•œ neutral red ๊ฒ€์ •๋ฒ•์€ ๋ชจ๋“  sealer์—์„œ ๋ฏผ๊ฐํ•œ ๋ฐ˜์‘์„ ๊ด€์ฐฐํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์–ด์„œ ๊ทผ๊ด€์ถฉ์ „์šฉ Sealer์˜ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ ์‹œํ—˜๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์œผ๋กœ ๋ณด๋‹ค ์ ํ•ฉํ•  ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์‚ฌ๋ฃŒ๋œ๋‹ค. [์˜๋ฌธ] To investigate and compare the cytotoxic sensitivity of the root canal sealers to the different testing method, this study has been done on the 4 kinds of sealer using agar overlay method (measuring the permeability of the cell membrane by vitalslain), MTT assay (measuring the activity of succinate dehydrogenase in mitochondria) and Neutral red assay (measuring the activity of lysosome) with the L929 cell of the mouse fibroblast. Also all specimens were reacted with the cells immediately, 24 hours and 72 hours after mixing in order to study the changes of cytotoxicity according to setting process. Results were as follows : 1. For the agar overlay method, NOgenol and Sealapex showed moderate toxicity and AH26 and Tubli-seal showed mild toxicity and all sealers except Sealapex appears to be less toxic as the time passed after mixing. 2. For the MTT assay, AH26 showed severe, Sealapex and Tubli-seal moderate and NOgenol non-toxic. 3. For the MTT assay, cytotoxicity increased with the lapse of the cultivation time, but AH26 and Sealapex appears to be more toxic as the time passed after mixng. 4. Fer the neutral red assay, all sealers were more toxic at 6 hours after cultivation than 12 hours and the cytotoxicity were decreased with the lapse of the cultivation time regardless of the time sequence after mixing. As the result of thin study, the sensitivity in the cytotoxicity of same root canal sealer did not show the good correlation in the case of agar overlay method and MTT assay. As the neutral red assay has been done to simulate the clinical situation and the more sensitive reactions of all sealers were skewed, the neutral red assay is considered to be the adequate testing method of cytotoxicity for the root canal sealers.restrictio

    (An) experimental study of the cytotoxicity of some dental amalgam alloys

    No full text
    ์น˜์˜ํ•™๊ณผ/์„์‚ฌ[ํ•œ๊ธ€] ์น˜๊ณผ์šฉ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ์€ ์น˜์•„ ์ˆ˜๋ณต์žฌ๋กœ์„œ ๋„๋ฆฌ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฌ๋ฃŒ์ด๋‹ค. ์ข…๋ž˜์˜ ์น˜๊ณผ์šฉ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ์€ ๋™(้Š…)์˜ ํ•จ๋Ÿ‰์ด ๋‚ฎ์€ ์ €๋™ํ˜•์ด์—ˆ์œผ๋‚˜, ์ตœ๊ทผ ๋™์˜ ๊ตฌ์„ฑ๋น„๋ฅผ ์ตœ๊ณ  30%๊นŒ์ง€ ์ฆ๊ฐ€์‹œํ‚จ ๊ณ ๋™์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ์ด ์†Œ๊ฐœ๋˜์–ด ์ข…๋ž˜์˜ ์ €๋™ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋ฌผ๋ฆฌ์  ์„ฑ์งˆ์ด ํ–ฅ์ƒ ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ํ˜„์žฌ ๊ตญ๋‚ด์—์„œ ์ƒ์‚ฐ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์ €๋™ ๋ฐ ๊ณ ๋™ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ์ด ์ˆ˜์ž…๋œ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ๊ณผ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ์‹œํŒ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์–ด์„œ ์ €์ž๋Š” ๊ตญ๋‚ด์—์„œ ์œ ํ†ต๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์น˜๊ณผ์šฉ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ์ค‘ 7์ข…์„ ์„ ํƒํ•˜์—ฌ ์ด๋“ค์˜ ์ƒ๋ฌผํ•™์  ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๊ด€์ฐฐํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ์ฅ์˜ ํ”ผํ•˜์„ฌ์œ ์•„์„ธํฌ์—์„œ ๋ถ„๋ฆฌ, ๋ฐฐ์–‘๋œ L929 ์„ธ ํฌ๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ์—ฐํ™”ํ›„ ์ฆ‰์‹œ, 24์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  48์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๊ฒฝํ™” ํ›„ ์„ธํฌ์™€ ์ ‘์ด‰์‹œ์ผœ 37.0ยฑ1.0โ„ƒ, 5% ํƒ„์‚ฐ๊ฐ€์Šค ํ•ญ์˜จ๊ธฐ์—์„œ ๋ฐฐ์–‘ํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ๋ฐฐ์–‘ 2,4,7์ผ ํ›„ ๊ฐ๊ฐ ์„ธํฌ์˜ ์ค‘์‹๋„ ๋ฐ ์„ธํฌ์˜ ํ˜•ํƒœ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ๊ด€์ฐฐํ•˜์—ฌ ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์„ ๋น„๊ตํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๊ฒฐ๋ก ์„ ์–ป์—ˆ๋‹ค. 1. ์ €๋™ ์ ˆ์‚ญํ˜• ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ("C","D")์—์„œ ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ์— ๋น„ํ•˜์—ฌ ์„ธํฌ์˜ ์ฆ์‹๋„๊ฐ€ ๋†’๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋ฐฐ์–‘ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ์— ์•„๋ง๊ฐ๊ณผ ์ ‘์ด‰๋œ ์„ธํฌ๋Š” ๋ณ€์„ฑ๊ดด์‚ฌ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฐ์–‘์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ๊ฒฝ๊ณผํ•จ์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ์ ์ฐจ ์›์‹ฌ๋ถ€์œ„์—์„œ๋ถ€ํ„ฐ ์ •์ƒํ˜•ํƒœ์˜ ์„ธํฌ๊ฐ€ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚˜๊ธฐ ์‹œ์ž‘ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. 2. ์ €๋™ ์ ˆ์‚ญํ˜• ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ("C","D")์—์„œ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ์—ฐํ™”ํ›„ ์„ธํฌ์™€ ์ ‘์ด‰ํ•  ๋•Œ๊นŒ์ง€์˜ ์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ๊ธธ์ˆ˜๋ก ์„ธํฌ๋…์„ฑ์ด ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. 3. ์•„์—ฐ์ด ํ•จ์œ ๋œ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ("B","F") ๋ฐ ๊ณ ๋™ ์•„๋ง๊ฐ ํ•ฉ๊ธˆ("A","E","G")์—์„œ ๋ฐฐ์–‘์ดˆ๊ธฐ์— ์ƒ์กด์„ธํฌ์ˆ˜๊ฐ€ ๊ธ‰๊ฒฉํžˆ ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋ฐฐ์–‘์ด ๊ณ„์†๋˜์–ด๋„ ํšŒ๋ณต๋˜์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค. [์˜๋ฌธ] To study the cytotoxicity of dental amalgam alloys, a cell culture system with L strain fibroblasts was used, and certain amount of cells were cultivated in the culture well containing seven kinds of amalgam specimens which had been obtained immediately,24 hours, and 48 hours after trituration. On day 2,4, and 7 of cultivation, the cells were harvester using 0.25% trypsin and counted after staining with 0.3% trypan blue. The number of viable cells was assessed by calculating the relative growth rate compared with the normal control group, Also, the changes in the shape of the cells which had contacted with the amalgam specimens were examined with a phase-contrast microscope. The results were as follow; 1. Low-copper, lathe-cut amalgams("C", "D") showed a highest cell multiplication rate com-pared to the other amalgams, and in the early cultivation time, the cells contacting the specimens were degenerated, but with the lapse of the cultivation time, the cells were recovered. 2. Low copper, lathe-cut amalgams ("C", "D") showed a higher cytotoxicity in the specimen immediately after trituration than at 24 hours after trituration. 3. Amalgams containing zinc ("B", "F") and high copper amalgams ("A", "E", "G") showed a rapid decrease in viable cells, and the surviving cells did not recover with the lapse of the cultivation time.restrictio

    Pleomorphic adenoma in accessory salivary gland: A case report

    No full text
    ๋ถ€ํƒ€์•ก์„์€ ์•ฝ20%์˜ ์‚ฌ๋žŒ์—์„œ ์กด์žฌํ•˜๋ฉฐ, ์ดํ•˜์„ ๊ณผ ์ดํ•˜์„  ๋„๊ด€ ์ „๋ฐฉ๋ถ€์—์„œ ๊ด€์ฐฐ๋˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝ์šฐ๊ฐ€ ๋งŽ๋‹ค. ๋ถ€ํƒ€์•ก์„ ์˜ ๋ณ‘๋ฆฌํ•™์  ๋ณ€ํ™” ์–‘์ƒ์€ ์œ ๋ณ‘์œจ์ด ๋‚ฎ์œผ๋ฉฐ ๋ณด๊ณ ๋œ ๋ฐ”๊ฐ€ ๋งŽ์ง€ ์•Š๊ธฐ์— ๋ณธ ์ฆ๋ก€๋ฅผ ๋ณด๊ณ ํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ”์ด๋‹ค
    corecore