KR20070061979A - Preliminary impression trays for korean edentulous mandible and preparation method thereof - Google Patents

Abstract

A preliminary impression trays for Korean maxillary and mandibular edentulous dental arch and a preparation method thereof are provided to be used to treatment since they are suitable for Korean edentulous alveolar ridge by the even thickness of an impression body relative to an existing tray. The preliminary impression trays for Korean edentulous dental arch include: a tray for a maxillary edentulous dental arch selected from a tray group formed in certain sizes with respect to a vertical height in a front part, a vertical height in a rear part, a horizontal width in a B3/4 part, and a thalamus length from a mid-line; and a tray for a mandibular edentulous dental arch selected from a tray group formed in certain sizes with respect to 1/4 buccal width, 2/4 buccal width, 3/4 buccal width, and 4/4 buccal width, and 2/4 lingual width, 3/4 lingual width, and 4/4 lingual width.

Description

Preliminary Impression Trays for Korean Edentulous Mandible and Preparation Method Thereof}

1 is a photograph showing a research model for measurement,

2 is a photograph showing a measuring point and a reference line of the mandibular edentulous model.

1: mid-line, 2: the most posterior line,

3: the half line of retromolar pad,

4: 4/4 reference line, 5: 3/4 reference line,

6: 2/4 reference line, 7: 1/4 reference line,

8. the most anterior line

3a and 3b is a photograph showing a three-dimensional measuring instrument,

4 is a photograph showing a reference line,

5 is a photograph showing a front and rear distance measurement item,

1: width between left-right buccal margin, 2: width between left-right tooth adjustment,

3: width between left and right palatal margins, 4: width between palatal and palatal margins,

5: width between chisel adjustment part and buccal margin, 6: height between chief adjustment part and buccal margin,

7: height between palatal and palatal margins

Figure 6 is a photograph showing each measurement in the horizontal plane, sagittal plane, frontal plane,

7 is a cross-sectional view showing the classification before and after in the horizontal plane,

ANOVA: comparison of alveolar components according to clinical form,

Duncan's test: Various comparisons of alveolar components showing effective differences in ANOVA analysis according to clinical form

8A to 8D are graphs showing sixth order polynomials of four arches,

9 is a reference point for showing the classification of the palate in the sagittal plane,

10 is a reference point for the classification of the palatal arch form in the frontal plane,

11 is a reference point for measurement of labial frenum (left) and buccal frenum (right),

12 is a graph showing the palatal depth in the sagittal plane,

13A and 13B are graphs showing alveolar and margin widths in each size group,

14 is a three-dimensional coordinate axis for the angle measurement of the periodontal arch,

15 is a wire framework structure of the periodontal arch,

16 is a new tray structure finally designed based on the completed framework,

17A to 17D are graphs showing the distribution of the length measurement and the thickness measurement in all measurement values of the new tray and the existing tray,

18A and 18B are graphs showing paired sample t-test results for respective portions of thicknesses of new trays and existing trays.

19A and 19B are graphs showing the number of times the trays are used in two trays out of 51 samples.

20A and 20B are graphs showing impression taking (length and thickness) in clinical trials using a newly developed tray,

21A and 21B are schematic diagrams showing three-dimensional points on AutoCAD and their smooth spline points;

22a to 22c is a schematic diagram showing the alveolar arch of the arch of arch in AutoCAD,

23A- 23C are schematic diagrams in the case where a 4 mm gap is maintained between the dental arch and the tray inner surface in AutoCAD,

24A- 24C are schematic views of impression trays on the inner surface of the arches of arch in AutoCAD,

25 is a complete view of a tray model manufactured by the Cimatron90 system,

Figure 26 is a completed Korean mandible preliminary tray tray picture,

27A to 27C are photographs showing the morphological characteristics of the developed Korean lower jaw tray,

28 is a photograph of a conventional edentulous tray used for comparison,

29 is a photograph showing a model of a newly developed tray,

30A to 30F are graphs showing comparisons of buccal margin margins between Korean statistics and conventional tray measurements (limbic margins between the left and right margins),

31A to 31F are graphs showing the comparison of the buccal margin margin between Korean statistics and the measurement value of the new tray (the margin width between the left and right margins),

32A and 32B are graphs showing a comparison of total pre-post arch length and maximum arch width,

33 is a graph showing a comparison of length / width ratios;

34 is a graph showing a comparison of impression thickness between a conventional tray and a new tray;

35 is a graph showing a comparison of the ratios of the impression thicknesses between the conventional tray and the new tray;

36A and 36B are graphs showing the distribution of the total area of the impression body thickness,

37A and 37B are graphs showing the distribution of the left and right averages of the impression thickness,

38 is a graph showing an overall distribution of impression body thicknesses;

39A to 39D are graphs showing the distribution of the total area ( FIG. 39A ), buccal area ( FIG. 39B ), palatal area ( FIG. 39C ), and tooth adjuster area ( FIG. 39D ) of the impression thickness.

The present invention relates to an edentulous impression taking tray, a manufacturing method thereof, and a method of selecting a pair of trays for acquiring a dental impression of a subject, and more particularly, a vertical height (mm) at a front part and a vertical height (mm) at a rear part. ), A tray for maxillary gingival impression taken from a tray crowd consisting of a horizontal width (mm) at the B3 / 4 and a sagittal length (mm) at the centerline, and 1/4 buccal width (mm), 2/4 Buccal width (mm), 3/4 buccal width (mm) and 4/4 buccal width (mm) and 2/4 lingual width (mm), 3/4 lingual width (mm) and 4/4 lingual width (mm) To acquire a dental impression of a subject selecting a tray pair for a mandibular edentulous impression acquisition tray selected from a crowd of trays of this particular standard, a method for manufacturing the maxillary or edentulous impression acquisition tray, and a pair of trays suitable for the subject of the manufactured tray. To select the tray pair .

Successful total denture treatment requires oral treatment planning, accurate impressions, functional and aesthetically pleasing prostheses, and ongoing prognosis. Everyone acknowledges the importance of impressions in making dentures. Impressions can be categorized as simple impression taking to obtain the sound form of an intraoral anatomical structure, and impression making to impress the dental tissue by the intention of the technician, depending on the purpose ( Hicky, JC et al, BOUCHER'S Prosthodontic Treatment for dental Patients, St. Louis, The CV Mosby Co., 1975;.. Bernard Levin, Impression for Complete dentures, illinois, Quintessence Publishing Inc., Chicago, 1983; Jeong Jae-heon, dentures school , South Korea, 1993; Minagi, S. et.al. , Int. J. Prosthod ., 1 : 149-152, 1988). In general, impression refers to the acquisition made by the intention of the technician, not just the acquisition.

In addition, the impression is a sound record obtained for supporting, stabilizing, and blocking the dentition in the dental cavity. It is divided into a preliminary impression for the diagnosis and the final impression for the final prosthesis. Plays a very important role in treatment In order to accurately obtain the final impression, it is important to make a personal tray that is suitable for each patient. The individual tray is manufactured on a research model based on a preliminary impression. Since the enlargement of the denture base is mainly determined from the preliminary impression, the correct preliminary impression should include not only all the anatomical structures available for the denture base but also extend slightly beyond the margins of the denture base. If all the anatomical structures that are to be included in the denture are not obtained from the preliminary impression, then an accurate individual tray cannot be produced from the study model produced therefrom, indicating a failure of the final denture impression (Levin, B., illinois, Quintessence). Publishing Inc. , Chicago, 1983). Therefore, the good and bad of preliminary impressions for the dentures are not exaggerated even if they are the success or failure of the production of the dentures, and the accuracy of the research model produced by the preliminary impressions is also very important. Therefore, in order to obtain accurate and excellent preliminary impressions, knowledge of oral anatomy and technique of technicians are fundamentally important, but selection of appropriate tray, selection and mixing of appropriate impression materials, knowledge of patient oral condition, and skill of technician are required. (Hichy, JC et. Al ., Boucher's Prosthodontic Treatment for Edenturulous Patients , 10th ed., The CV Mosby Co., Louis, 176-181, 1990; Bernard Levin, Impression for Complete dentures.Illinois , Quintessence Publishing Inc., Chicago, 1983; Jeong Jae-heon, dentures studies, first edition, listening Inc., 138-141, 1993).

Impressions play an important role in the manufacture of prosthetics and much research has been done on this. The accuracy of this important impression can be determined by several studies through the thickness of the impression material (Eames, WB et. Al., J. Prosthet. Dent ., 41 : 304-307, 1979; Phillips, RW, J. Ohio Dent. Asso ., 45 : 236-308, 1968; Asgar, K., Dent. Clin.North Am. , 15 : 81, 1971; Reisbick, MH and Matyas, J., J. Prosthet.Dent. , 33 : 67-72, 1975; Rudd, KD et al., J. Prosthet. Dent ., 22 : 294-300, 1969; Bomberg, TJ et. Al., J. Prosthet.Dent ., 54 : 170-172, 1985; David, AF, et.al., Dent.Clin.North Am ., 40 : 39-45, 1996), in the form of trays (Woodward, JD et. al., J. Prosthet.Dent ., 53 : 347-350, 1985; Arturo , JM et al, J. Prosthet Dent , 54:.... 383-388, 1985; Ogden, AR et al, Br Dent J, 176:..... 303-309, 1994; Valderhaug, J. and Floystrand, F., J. Prosthet Dent, 52:.... 514-517, 1984; Joseph, VM and Joseph, JD, J. Prosthet Dent, 33: 67-72, 1975) and goodness of fit (, for such songdaeseong Journal of Advanced, 27: 131-141, 1989; Shillingberg , HT et al, J. Am Dent Assoc, 100:..... 696-699, 1980) , etc. It is known that many recipients affected by the factors. Specifically, Wang et al. (Wang, HY et. Al., J. Prosthet. Dent. , 75 : 302-308, 1975) reported on the accuracy of the impression material and the type of tray, and on the suitability of the tray. Eames et al . (Eames, WB et. Al ., J. Prosthet. Dent ., 41 : 304-307, 1979) and Phillips (Phillips, RW, J. Ohio Dent. Asso. , 45 : 236-308, 1968). The thickness of the tray and the inner surface of rubber impression material was 2 mm, and Asgar (Asgar, K., Dent. Clin. North Ame ., 15 : 81, 1971) was 3-4 mm, Reisbick et al. (Reisbick, MH) and Matyas, J., J. Prosthet. Dent ., 33 : 67-72, 1975) reported that 2-4 mm is appropriate. Regarding handing colloid impression materials, Rudd et al . (Rudd, KD et. Al ., J. Prosthet. Dent ., 22 : 294-300, 1969) have a thickness of 3 to 6 mm, and David et al . (David, AF and Lyndon). , FC, Dent. Clin.North Ame ., 40 : 39-45, 1996), maintaining a thickness of 2-3 mm is appropriate for the impression.

Although various efforts have been made to obtain accurate preliminary impressions, these studies have been mainly focused on impression material itself, impression material, and trays, and the possibility of deformation due to the use of appropriate impression trays. Has paid little attention.

In addition, some morphological studies focus on some alveolar alveolar uterus (Dean, LJ et. Al., J. Am. Dent. Assoc ., 113 : 35-40, 1986; Miyake, S. et. Al. ., Nippon Hotetsu Shoka Gakkai Zasshi , 34 : 442-452, 1990; Luthra, SP, J. Prosthet.Dent. , 30 : 25-28, 1973; Uctasli, S. et.al. , J. Oral.Rehabilitation, 24: 164-169, 1997; Esa, K. et al, J. Prosthet Dent, 75:.... 281-284, 1996) a study about the most evil attract alveolar jegung except for (ohyuri, Kyunghee University Graduate Thesis, Master's Thesis, 1995; Nam Jong-hyun, Graduate School of Kyunghee University , Master's Thesis, 1995; Kim Il-han, Graduate School of Kyunghee University , Master's Thesis, 1996; Kim Sang-chul and Nam Dong-yang, Journal of Korean Orthodontics , 14 : 93-101, 1984; Young-Cheol Lee and Young-Chul Park, The Korean Academy of Orthodontics , 17 : 279-287, 1987; Jong-Hyun Nam and Ki-Soo Lee, The Korean Journal of Orthodontics , 26 : 535-564, 1996; Kwon, Yong-Cheol et al., The Korean Academy of Orthodontics , 19 : 95-105, 1989; Sampson, PD, Am. J. Orthod ., 79 : 535-548, 1981; Raberin, M. et. Al., Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. , 104 : 67-72, 1993; Ferrario, VF et. Al., Archs. Biol ., 39 : 135-139, 1994; Stanley, B. et.al., Orthod ., 68 : 29-36, 1998; Joanna, MB, Br. J. Ortho ., 23 : 21-28, 1996; Ferrario, VF et al ., Er. J. Ortho , 16 : 287-294, 1994). Specifically, Dean et al. (Dean, LJ et. Al., J. Am. Dent. Assoc ., 113 : 35-40, 1986) reported on the palatal morphology of the alveolar alveolar uterus, and Miyake et al. (Miyake, S. et al., Nippon Hotetsu Shoka Gakkai Zasshi , 34 : 442-452, 1990). However, some of these foreign studies (Dean, LJ et. Al., J. Am. Dent. Assoc ., 113 : 35-40, 1986; Miyake, S. et. Al., Nippon Hotetsu Shoka Gakkai Zasshi , 34 : 442) -452, 1990; Luthra, SP, J. Prosthet.Dent. , 30 : 25-28, 1973; Uctasli, S. et.al. , J. Oral.Rehabilitation, 24 : 164-169, 1997; Esa, K et. al., J. Prosthet.Dent. , 75 : 281-284, 1996), and other studies on alveolar alveolar uterus are scarce, especially in Korea.

As explained above, preliminary impressions in the production of dentures affect a series of processes, including the production of individual trays for diagnosis and final impressions (Bernard Levin, Impression for Complete dentures. Illinois , Quintessence Publishing Inc., Chicago, 1983). For accurate preliminary impressions, the edentulous tray is preferably sized to include an anatomical structure.

On the other hand, irreversible aqueous colloidal impression materials are widely used in dentistry, and research on the proper use and importance of tray selection has been made. When the impression is taken using an irreversible aqueous colloid impression material, it is known that the thickness between the tray and the teeth should be 1/8 to 1/4 inch or more to prevent deformation and to obtain maximum precision. Since the irreversible aqueous colloid impression material is mostly non-adhesive and maintained by mechanical bonding, metal trays are better than plastic trays, and precise impressions are possible only by using perforated trays or rim-lock trays. Dental Materials , First Edition, Gunja Publisher, 109-115, 1995).

In addition, the effect of tray type on the precision of impressions was studied by Michell and Damele (Michell, JV and Damele, JJ, J. Prosthet. Dent. , 23 : 551-557, 1970) using irreversible elastic material. Heartwell et al . ( J. Prosthet. Dent ., 27 : 494-500, 1972), Mendez (Mendez, AJ, J. Prosthet. Dent ., 54 : 383). -388, 1985), Woodward et al. (Woodward, JD, J. Prosthet. Dent ., 53 : 347-350, 1985) studied the precision of perforated trays and rimlock trays and called them more stable, and Valderhaug and Floystrand (Valderhaug). , J. and Floystrand, F., J. Prosthet.Dent. , 52 : 514-517, 1984), Tjan and Whang (Tjan An, Hl and Whang, SB, J. Prosthet. Den t., 58 : 175- 178, 1987), Biffar and Bettner (Biffar, R. and Bittner, B., Dtsch.Zahnartl. Z. , 44 (8) : 624-627, 1989) studied the accuracy of ready-made and individual trays. Arturo et al. (Arturo, JM, et.al. , J. Pro sthet.Dent. , 54 : 383-388, 1985) said that the perforated trays were stable in width and length, and the rimlock trays were stable in palatal depth. Ogden et al. (Ogden, AR et. Al. , Br. Dent. J. , 176 : 303-309, 1994) found that it was impossible to accurately raise every part of the margin in a study of the fit of the edentulous tray. Among the factors affecting the accuracy of the impression, the material problem of the impression material itself has been continuously improved to date, and the factor due to the tray is mainly a childish music center, and a study on the thickness of the tray and the inner surface and the shape of the tray Was most of them.

As such, the selection of the tray to fit the patient's alveolar arch is important when the impression is taken, and the shape of the tray causes a great change in the amount of deformation of the impression material (Michell, JV and Damele, JJ, J. Prosthet.Dent. , 23 : 551-557, 1970; Johnston, JF and Philips, RW, Modern Practice in Crown and Bridge Prosthodontics , 3rd ed., Philadelphia.WB.Saunders Co., 1971). A suitable tray should cover the necessary anatomical structures, provide adequate space for the impression material on the inside of the tray, and be able to hold the hardened impression material firmly (Shillingburg, HT et. Al ., Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics , 2nd ed., Chicago: Quintessence publ.Co., 228, 1981). The tray having a similar shape to the dental arch and the alveolar uterus ensures a uniform thickness of the impression material, and as mentioned in the report, it can be seen that the thickness of the elastic impression material and the hydraulic impression material has a great influence on the accuracy of the impression.

On the other hand, in order to obtain an optimum preliminary impression, it is important to select a commercially available ready-made tray appropriately. If the tray is too large, it will deform the tissue around the margin of the impression and push the soft tissue underneath the impression from the bone. On the other hand, if the tray is too small, the marginal tissue will sink into the alveolar phase. This will reduce cleft lip support for dentures and impede proper support of the lip by denture base. Thus, the size of the tray can usually include all of the important anatomical structures and is large and free to allow uniform space of about 2 to 3 mm between the remaining alveolar and the inner surface of the tray, and the vestibular space. It is clinically useful to choose to include a slightly wider range. To this end, current clinical trials are using impression-ready trays that are manufactured by size to raise impressions. The selection of appropriate trays has a great effect on the status of the acquisition. However, most of the commercially available trays used in Korea are based on statistics based on the standards of Westerners. The alveolar arch and the arch form differ from those of Westerners (Yong Jong-deok, Korean Dental Association , 13 : 533-538, 1975; Woo Sang-min, Korean Journal of Dental Prosthetics , 8 : 30-36, 1968). It is known that the width between the left and right canine and posterior teeth is larger than that of Westerners (Kim Sung-il and Shim-sun, The Korean Journal of Dental Prosthodontics , 9 : 303-311, 1969; Nam Jong-hyun and Lee Ki-su, Korean Journal of Orthodontics , 26 (5) : 535- 564, 1996; Lee Young-chul and Park Young-chul, Journal of the Korean Academy of Orthodontics , 17 : 279-287, 1987).

In addition, in the study of Korean adult detainees, ready-made trays produced by Western statistics were not suitable for Korean dental arch and alveolar uterus (Song, Dae-Sung et al . , 27 : 131-141, 1989). . In addition, analysis of the shape and size of the archery has been steadily conducted for the deceased teeth, and studies on the fabrication of the tray suitable for Koreans and research on the suitability thereof have reported good results. No studies have been carried out, so there has been no study on the accuracy of ready-made trays and impressions in edentulous music. As such, most of the researches on Korean dental archery have been performed by orthodontic or prosthetic approach of the alveolar uterus. The study of alveolar bone after alveolar bone and the shape of alveolar bone (Jaime Poetrkovski, CD, J. Prosthet. Dent ., 34 (4) : 456-462, 1973) was performed. There is no report on the production of. Therefore, most of the ready-to-use qicheo trays that are currently commercially available in Korea are manufactured and imported to suit the gingival alveolar preparations of Westerners, and even if they are manufactured in Korea, all of them are imitated as foreign, or designed and manufactured by non-scientific methods. It is clinically difficult to apply ready-made trays based on Western statistical data to Korean dental arches, which may threaten the success of total denture treatment.

As a result, the preliminary impression that can be used as the basis for restoring the total denture of the edentulous patients to date has been clinically used since it uses trays that meet foreign standards that differ from the Korean alveolar uterus. Due to the difficulty, the present inventors have conducted a study on the alveolar uterus form of Korean adults, the maxillary and mandibular statistic data of Koreans, and the morphology and size of gingival teeth, and based on this, the maxillary and mandibular gingiva of Koreans that can be applied to actual clinical practice The present invention was completed by designing a preliminary impression tray suitable for the arch, fabrication of a prototype and inspection of its suitability.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION An object of the present invention is to provide a tray for obtaining a maxillary and a mandibular arch preliminary impression suitable for a Korean dental arch, and a method for manufacturing the same and a method for selecting a pair of trays for a dental impression of a subject.

In order to achieve the above object, the present invention provides a vertical height (mm) at the front part of the first tray, a vertical height (mm) at the rear part, a horizontal width diameter (mm) at the B3 / 4 area and a sagittal length (mm) at the centerline. (Hereafter in the same order) are 13.0-14.0, 12.5-13.5, 60-65 and 49-53, the second tray is 13.0-14.0, 13.0-14.0, 62-68 and 50-55, and the third tray is 13.5 -14.5, 13.5-14.5, 65-75 and 51-56, the fourth tray is 14.0-15.0, 14.0-15.0, 68-78 and 51-58, and the fifth tray is 14.0-15.0, 14.0-15.0, 73- Provided is a tray for maxillary gingival impression taken from a tray crowd consisting of 83 and 54-62.

In addition, the present invention is 1/4 buccal width (mm), 2/4 buccal width (mm), 3/4 buccal width (mm) and 4/4 buccal width (mm) of the first tray (hereinafter, in the same order) ) 36-38, 45-51, 63.5-64.5 and 65-66, the second tray 38-42, 51-57, 64.5-68 and 64.5-67.5, the third tray 42-45, 57-59.5 68-71 and 67.5-69.5, the fourth tray is 45-45.5, 59.5-61, 71-72.5 and 69.5-71.5, the fifth tray is 45.5-47, 61-64, 72.5-76 and 71.5-75, and The sixth tray consists of 47-49.5, 64-70, 76-80 and 75-79, and the 2/4 lingual width (mm), 3/4 lingual width (mm) and 4/4 lingual width of the first tray (Mm) (hereinafter in the same order) are 17-19, 29-31.5 and 33-35.5, respectively, the second tray is 19-22, 31.5-33 and 35.5-38.5, and the third tray is 22-25, 33- 34.5 and 38.5-41, the fourth tray is 25-26, the 34.5-36 and 41-43, the fifth tray is 26-29, 36-39 and 43-46, and the sixth tray is 29-35, 39-44 And a tray selected from the group consisting of 46-54 Provides a tray for taking evil impressions.

In addition, the present invention includes the steps of: i) replicating the edentulous main model from the subject; Ii) setting 20 to 50 reference points in the main model and measuring them in three dimensions; Iii) classifying the size of the alveolar arch based on the three-dimensional measurement; Iii) converting the size of the classified alveolar arch into three-dimensional spatial coordinates to form the form of the alveolar into a schematic tray; And iii) modeling and processing the schematic tray, to provide a manufacturing method of the upper or lower jawless impression impression taking tray.

In addition, the present invention is a plurality of trays according to the size of the subject's jaw, the width of the left and right alveolar jeongjak of the alveolar nodules in the case of the maxilla of the subject, the width of the left and right alveolar jeonggap of the anterior region of the posterior nodules And a reference table for detecting the intrinsic colors corresponding to each other by contacting the divider, which is measured and the length of which is opened, without being restored to its original state, and classified into a plurality of maxillary and mandibular trays according to the tooth size of the examinee. A tray sorting step; Ii) assigning an intrinsic color to a pair of upper and lower jaw trays that are classified in the same manner and assigning a different intrinsic color to each pair of upper and lower jaw trays classified differently; A divider measuring step of measuring width between left and right alveolar ridges of the alveolar nodules in the case of the maxilla, and measuring width of left and right alveolar vices in the anterior segment of the posterior nodules using the divider; Iii) a color detection step of detecting a corresponding eigencolor by measuring the reference table to be described later while leaving the measured divider intact; And iii) a tray selection step of selecting a tray pair corresponding to the intrinsic color of the reference table.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail.

The present invention provides a vertical height (mm) at the front part of the first tray, a vertical height (mm) at the rear part, a horizontal width diameter (mm) at the B3 / 4 part and a sagittal length (mm) at the center line (hereinafter, in the same order). 13.0-14.0, 12.5-13.5, 60-65 and 49-53, the second tray 13.0-14.0, 13.0-14.0, 62-68 and 50-55, the third tray 13.5-14.5, 13.5-14.5, 65-75 and 51-56, the fourth tray consists of 14.0-15.0, 14.0-15.0, 68-78 and 51-58, and the fifth tray consists of 14.0-15.0, 14.0-15.0, 73-83 and 54-62 Provides a tray for maxillary edentulous impressions selected from a tray crowd.

At this time, the maxillary edentulous impression acquisition tray is additionally the width of the arch of the arch in the B 3/4 area (mm) of the first tray and the width of the inner surface of the tray (mm) in the B 3/4 area (hereinafter, in the same order) 57 and 61 and 61-64, the second tray is 57-61 and 61-64, the third tray is 61-65 and 64-68, the fourth tray is 65-69 and 68-72, and the fifth tray is It is preferable to select from a tray crowd consisting of 69-73 and 72-76.

In addition, the maxillary edentulous impression taking tray has a vertical height (mm) at the front portion of the first tray, a vertical height (mm) at the rear portion, a horizontal width diameter (mm) at the B3 / 4 region, the sagittal length (mm) And width / length ratios (hereinafter in the same order) are 13.5, 13, 62, 51 and 1.22, the second tray is 13.5, 13.5, 65.5, 52 and 1.26, the third tray is 14, 14, 70, 53.5 and More preferably, 1.31, the fourth tray is selected from the tray crowd consisting of 14.5, 14.5, 73.5, 54.5 and 1.35, and the fifth tray is comprised of 14.5, 14.5, 78, 58 and 1.35, in addition to B 3 of the first tray. The width of the archery (mm) at the / 4 site and the width of the inner surface of the tray (mm) (hereafter in the same order) at the B 3/4 site are 57 or less and 58.18, respectively, and the second tray is 57-61 and 62.65, The third tray is 61-65 and 67.30, the fourth tray is 65-69 and 69.85, the fifth tray is 69-73 and 7 Most preferably it is chosen from a crowd of trays of 4.32.

The present inventors made a preliminary impression for the replication model by using a ready-made tray for the master model of the patient to produce a model for maxillary research for the preparation of a preliminary impression tray suitable for the Korean maxillary arch. After making the individual trays based on the preliminary impressions and forming the margins, the final impressions were obtained by making the final impressions, and then the research replica model was produced by the third type hard stone gypsum mixed in vacuum with the acquired impressions. 1).

The maxillary edentulous model was pre-measured using a three-dimensional measuring instrument designed for the patient, and the ratio between the angle and the measurement item was calculated (see FIGS. 2, 3A, and 3B).

Specifically, the average of the line measurement item measurement values measured at the 1/8, 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 reference lines for the widths of the margins and the alveolar agent (see Table 1). As a result, it was confirmed that there were no significant differences among the males and females in the remaining 29 items except the five items of the intersection of the reference horizontal line and the vertical line as the average of the line measurement items. In addition, the angles of the horizontal plane, sagittal plane and frontal plane were measured (see FIG. 6).

Based on the measurement, the model is visually classified into clinical V, O, and U types, and then classified into horizontal form classifications by statistically treating models classified in the same form four or more times in common (see Table 2). In addition, the differences among the measurement items among the clinical classification groups showed differences in alveolar items rather than marginal items (see Table 3). In addition, the pattern of differences between clinical classification groups showed no difference between clinical O and U types according to the Duncan's test, and clinical V type showed differences from clinical O and U types. U type is ovoid arch, T type is a thin arch shape (see Fig. 7), so the whole is ovoid (O) and taper (T) shape Classified. In this way, the types classified by the front and rear alveolar items can be classified into four types (TW, TN, OW, ON type) by combining them, and as a result, the OW type is most distributed (table 4). In addition, as a result of palatal classification in the sagittal plane, it was distributed in the order of mildly inclined (51.6%), steep (39.3%), and flat (9.0%). The results indicate that the angle shifted from the anterior to the posterior of the sagittal plane correlates with the alveolar height in the anterior portion, which is also correlated with the degree of absorption of the alveolar agent. In addition, as a result of palatal classification on the frontal surface, it is distributed in the order of V-arch, O-arch, and U-arch (see FIG. 10 and Table 6). In addition, the average of the horizontal items according to the size group (see Table 11), and the difference between the horizontal items according to the size group (see Table 12).

As a result, there was a significant difference in all parts of the width item of the alveolar, and all parts of the width item of the margin, and there was a significant difference only in 2 / 4D, 3 / 4D, and 4 / 4D of the palatal depth items, and B of the marginal and alveolar depth items. There is a significant difference only in 3 / 4D, and no difference in the remaining items. That is, it was confirmed that the size classification centered on the marginal 3/4 width diameter appeared appropriately around the width items.

The maxillary tray designs the alveolar for each size based on the measured values using a three-dimensional dedicated CAD / CAM system. Schreinemakers trays are used to compare the suitability of the existing main model with the fabricated trays and the existing trays.

Specifically, using AutoCAD for PC, the wire framework modeling of the archery was completed (see FIG. 15), and an aluminum alloy block was provided by giving an offset of 4 mm from the archery as a space for the impression body. The CNC milling machine cuts the tray to a thickness of 2 mm. Surface modeling of the arch model is performed, and the wire framework of the inner surface of the tray is designed with a space of 4 mm in three dimensions. Using the finished framework, a tray having a thickness of 2 mm is designed by solid modeling, and a slit-shaped holding shape and a front handle for the impression material are also designed and manufactured (see FIG. 16).

The prepared maxillary tray is visually observed and compared with the existing Schreinemakers system, and compared with each other. Specifically, visual observation was performed by measuring the anterior and posterior vertical height, the right and left width of the maxillary nodules, and the anteroposterior length on the midline, and comparing the ratio of the anterior and posterior lengths to the widths of the maxillary nodules in each tray. The tray is larger in the anterior part, similar or smaller in the posterior vertical height, and shorter in front and rear length compared to the left and right width diameters (see Table 20). In addition, it was confirmed by visual observation that the position of the buccal platoon was located relatively further behind the newly developed tray.

In the impression body obtained using the existing model, the length from the impression edge to the tray edge and the thickness of the impression body are measured (see Table 22 and Table 23). As a result, the newly developed tray and the conventional tray have a significant difference in the overall thickness of the impression body and the length of the marginal impression body, and the variation of each part in the newly developed tray appears small. In addition, as a result of checking the suitability, the newly developed tray showed an even thickness over all parts, and the length of the impression material appeared evenly on the margin.

From the above results, the newly developed tray in the goodness-of-fit test using the existing model shows a more uniform thickness of the impression material than the existing tray, and is generally closer to 4 mm, which is the thickness of the impression material originally set as the target. In terms of the length of the impression body, the Schreinemakers trays increase from posterior to anterior, while in the newly developed trays they are generally uniform.

In addition, the present invention is 1/4 buccal width (mm), 2/4 buccal width (mm), 3/4 buccal width (mm) and 4/4 buccal width (mm) of the first tray (hereinafter, in the same order) ) 36-38, 45-51, 63.5-64.5 and 65-66, the second tray 38-42, 51-57, 64.5-68 and 64.5-67.5, the third tray 42-45, 57-59.5 68-71 and 67.5-69.5, the fourth tray is 45-45.5, 59.5-61, 71-72.5 and 69.5-71.5, the fifth tray is 45.5-47, 61-64, 72.5-76 and 71.5-75, and The sixth tray consists of 47-49.5, 64-70, 76-80 and 75-79, and the 2/4 lingual width (mm), 3/4 lingual width (mm) and 4/4 lingual width of the first tray (Mm) (hereinafter in the same order) are 17-19, 29-31.5 and 33-35.5, respectively, the second tray is 19-22, 31.5-33 and 35.5-38.5, and the third tray is 22-25, 33- 34.5 and 38.5-41, the fourth tray is 25-26, the 34.5-36 and 41-43, the fifth tray is 26-29, 36-39 and 43-46, and the sixth tray is 29-35, 39-44 And a tray selected from the group consisting of 46-54 It provides a tray for edentulous impression.

At this time, the lower jaw impression tray is additionally the width (mm) and the total front and rear length (mm) (hereinafter in the same order) between the left and right 4/4 adjustment of the first tray is 65-66 and 42-46, two 66-68 and 46-49 for the third tray, 68-69.5 and 49-49.5 for the third tray, 69.5-72 and 49.5-51 for the fourth tray, 72-75 and 51-52 for the fifth tray, and sixth The tray is preferably selected from the tray crowd consisting of 75-79 and 52-53.

In addition, the mandible gingival impression taking tray has a 1/4 buccal width (mm), 2/4 buccal width (mm), 3/4 buccal width (mm) and 4/4 buccal width (mm) of the first tray (hereinafter , Same order) 37.42, 48.25, 64.03 and 65.76, the second tray 39.24, 54.32, 65.21 and 66.66, the third tray 44.53, 59.12, 70.31 and 68.72, the fourth tray 45.47, 60.02, 71.32 and 70.25 , The fifth tray consists of 45.53, 62.30, 74.05 and 73.55, and the sixth tray consists of 48.23, 67.20, 78.04 and 77.26, with the 2/4 lingual width (mm) and 3/4 lingual width (mm) of the first tray. And 4/4 lingual width in mm (hereinafter in the same order), respectively, 18.44, 30.44 and 34.78, the second tray is 20.23, 32.41 and 36.53, the third tray is 24.01, 34.02 and 40.42, the fourth tray is 25.43, 35.54 and 42.21, the fifth tray is selected from the tray crowd consisting of 26.32, 37 and 44.64, and the sixth tray 32.04, 42.20 and 50.32 In addition, the width (mm), total front and rear length (mm) and the ratio between length and width (in the same order) between the left and right 4/4 adjustments of the first tray are 65.76, 44.90 and 0.68, and the second tray is 66.66 From a crowd of trays consisting of 48.54 and 0.72, the third tray 68.72, 49.07 and 0.71, the fourth tray 70.25, 50.77 and 0.72, the fifth tray 73.55, 51.93 and 0.71, and the sixth tray 77.26, 52.00 and 0.67 Most preferably chosen.

The present inventors use the ready-made tray of the patient's master model (master model) for the preparation of the statistical data of the Korean mandibular teeth and mandibular gingival patients for the preparation of a preliminary impression tray suitable for Korean mandibular arches To obtain a preliminary impression for a replica model, to make a personal tray based on the preliminary impression, to obtain a final impression after forming a margin, and then to study with a type 3 hard gypsum mixed with vacuum in the acquired impression body. A prototype replication model was produced.

As a result of examining the significant difference between male and female in the mean and standard deviation measurement items of line measurement items, the total front and rear length (TAP), width between 3/4 left and right adjustment (AW3) and 4/4 right and left adjustment There are significant differences according to gender between male and female in three items of width AW4.

The size of the alveolar uterus shows the largest change in the lateral width change, especially in the baseline (the width between the 4/4 left and right tooth adjustments) following the anterior and left posterior nodules. As a result of classifying the size of the alveolar uterus, the size of the tray can be classified into six groups, and the distribution of each of the six groups is 56 to 60 mm, 52 to 56 mm, 60 to 64 mm, and 48 mm or less. Normal distribution curve is shown in order of 48-52 mm, and 64 mm or more (refer Table 16).

Looking at the mean value of each measurement item according to each group, as the classification group of alveolar uterus in the front and rear length items increases, the front and rear length items also increase in proportion to the width between the 4/4 tooth adjustments of the alveolar uterus. As it increases, the left and right width items generally increase proportionally. When reclassifying the mandibular alveolar arch using the results of each type of analysis by visual classification, it is possible to classify it into V type, O type, and U type, and there is no significant difference between O type and U type. When the alveolar type is classified by the front and rear classification elements, it is classified into V-T type, V-S type, O-T type and O-S type.

Tray shaping is performed based on the schematic alveolar form. Specifically, draw a tangent line in the alveolar ridge to draw an orthogonal line perpendicular to the tangent line, and set the tray coordinate on the waterline 4 mm away from the alveolar ridge coordinate as the tray vertex. It assigns to a tray marginal coordinate (refer FIG. 23A-FIG. 23C). The inner side of the tray is illustrated by connecting the three points of buccal, tooth adjustment, and lingual to the smooth curve (SPLINE). When the tray is connected to the lingual margins, the typical `` S curve '' of the mandibular lateral side is reproduced by using the lingual marginal coordinates of the alveolar 4/4 as the inflection point when projecting on the horizontal plane. Give it to the tray.

Model schematic tray data in AutoCAD for machining. In modeling work, a thickness of 2 mm is given for the strength of the tray, and the position and shape of the front and rear handles are also determined. In the case of the rear grip, the height of the alveolus corresponding to the position of the first molar was determined to be the height of the posterior nodules corresponding to the height of the posterior alveolar. In the case of the front handle, it is located 20 mm above the anterior buccal margin (see Fig. 25). After the modeling is completed by using a CNC to produce a Korean mandible preliminary impression tray (see Figure 26).

The newly developed Korean tray reproduces an anatomical 'S curve' in the lingual margin and extends outward in the buccal margin. In addition, the height of the rear handle is matched to the occlusal plane, and the position of the rear handle is rearward compared to the conventional tray (see FIGS. 27A to 27C).

When comparing the buccal width items of the conventional tray and the newly developed tray with the Korean model statistics, there is a difference between the two tray groups (see Table 24, Table 25 and Table 26). As a result, the buccal width of the newly developed tray generally coincides with the buccal width of Koreans (see Figs. 31A to 31F). When comparing lingual width items, both existing and newly developed trays generally matched the Korean model statistics (see Tables 27, 28 and 29). When comparing the maximum width and total length before and after the conventional tray and the newly developed tray, the newly developed tray shows the larger value in the width in the existing tray in the width (see FIGS. 32A and 32B). Therefore, the newly developed tray shows a small value in the length-to-width ratio, which is consistent with the Korean model statistics (see FIG. 33).

That is, the conventional commercial mandibular ready-made trays have a narrower narrowing width and an excessively long front and rear length than the Korean edentulous model statistics, indicating that the ready-made trays based on Western standards are not suitable for Koreans in terms of their shape and size. In other words, based on the statistical data of the Korean mandibular archery archery model, a new Korean mandibular jawless tray was produced and compared with the existing trays.

In addition, when comparing the thickness of the impression body when the impression of the tray between the existing tray and the newly manufactured tray is compared, the existing tray at each measurement site is irregular and the deviation is large, whereas the newly manufactured tray is uniform and small in all measurement areas. . When comparing the impression thickness distributions of 39 sites in the model conformity test, considering that the ideal irreversible aqueous colloid impression material thickness is 4-6 mm, many of the existing trays deviate from this category, but very few new trays are manufactured. Only is out of this category.

The pair sample t-test was performed to examine the difference between the existing tray and the newly developed tray. In addition, as a result of measuring the impression thickness during actual clinical application, many sites belong to the ideal category and are clinically suitable. That is, the newly developed mandibular gingival tray of the present invention is more suitable for the shape and size of Korean mandibular zirconia than the existing ready-made trays.

In addition, the present invention includes the steps of: i) replicating the edentulous main model from the subject; Ii) setting 20 to 50 reference points in the main model and measuring them in three dimensions; Iii) classifying the size of the alveolar arch based on the three-dimensional measurement; Iii) converting the size of the classified alveolar arch into three-dimensional spatial coordinates to form the form of the alveolar into a schematic tray; And iii) modeling and processing the schematic tray, to provide a manufacturing method of the upper or lower jawless impression impression taking tray.

At this time, in the manufacturing method of the upper or lower jaw gingival impression acquisition tray, it is preferable that the reference point of the step ii) is 39.

In the manufacturing method of the upper or lower jaw impression taking tray, the three-dimensional measurement is preferably performed on the line measurement side, and the line measurement is more preferably " width between 4/4 left and right teeth adjustment ".

In addition, in the manufacturing method of the upper or lower jaw impression taking tray, the drawing tray of step iii) shows the inner surface of the tray with "S curve" which connects three points of buccal, tooth adjustment and lingual in a smooth curve. It is desirable to.

In addition, the present invention is a plurality of trays according to the size of the subject's jaw, the width of the left and right alveolar jeongjak of the alveolar nodules in the case of the maxilla of the subject, the width of the left and right alveolar jeonggap of the anterior region of the posterior nodules in the case of the mandibular And a reference table for detecting the intrinsic colors corresponding to each other by contacting the divider, which is measured and the length of which is opened, without being restored to its original state, and classified into a plurality of maxillary and mandibular trays according to the tooth size of the examinee. A tray sorting step; Ii) assigning an intrinsic color to a pair of upper and lower jaw trays that are classified in the same manner and assigning a different intrinsic color to each pair of upper and lower jaw trays classified differently; A divider measuring step of measuring width between left and right alveolar ridges of the alveolar nodules in the case of the maxilla, and measuring width of left and right alveolar vices in the anterior segment of the posterior nodules using the divider; Iii) a color detection step of detecting a corresponding eigencolor by measuring the reference table to be described later while leaving the measured divider intact; And iii) a tray selection step of selecting a tray pair corresponding to the intrinsic color of the reference table.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail by way of examples.

However, the following examples are merely to illustrate the invention, but the content of the present invention is not limited to the following examples.

Example 1 Selection and Classification of Research Subjects

<1-1> Selection of Research Target

<1-1-1> Maxillary Research Target

122 patients with maxillary dentition who visited the Department of Prosthodontics, K-Dental Hospital, were prepared for the preparation of preliminary impression trays suitable for Korean maxillary uterus.The average age was 62.48. He was 61 years old (male 61.74, female 63.16).

<1-1-2> Mandibular Research Target

For the fabrication of preliminary impression tray suitable for Korean mandibular arch, Korean mandibular jaw member's statistical data (Kang Nam-hyun and Choi Kyun, Korean Society for the Study of Korean Society of Functional Function, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1999) was used. Based on these statistics, mandibular gingival trays were fabricated and 64 Korean mandibular gingival models were used for the suitability test.

Specifically, the anatomical structure, which is the core of the impression area, was acquired by impressions for 50 men and 100 patients, 100 men and women, who had recently received or received a total denture visit to K University Hospital. The main model of the mandibular edentulous mockup was cloned into the easily observed model.

<1-2> Model Making

In order to produce a study model of the upper and lower jaw of the study subjects, a preliminary impression for the cloning model was obtained by using a master tray (Schrene-makers Impression Trays, BV Tandheelkundige producten Clan, Germany). In this case, an irreversible aqueous colloidal impression material (Aroma Fine DF II, alginate, GC. Co., Japan) was used as the impression material. After making the individual tray based on the preliminary impressions, the final impressions were made after the formation of the margins. The final model was duplicated with the irreversible colloidal impression material, and then vacuum mixed with the obtained impressions. plastone, GC. Co., Japan) to produce a research replication model (Fig. 1).

Example 2 maxillary edentulous measurement

<2-1> Measurement Items and 3D Measuring Instruments

For the experimenter of Example <1-1-1>, 122 maxillary edentulous models were premeasured and the ratio between the angle and the measured item was calculated.

For each model, 39 reference points were set (FIG. 2) and measured in three dimensions. Specifically, a separate three-dimensional instrument was used to fabricate each model and measure the reference points determined in these models in coordinates that are three-dimensional (width, length, height / X, Y, Z coordinates). Two digital vernier calipers (Mitutoyo Co., Japan) and one digital depth gauge (Mitutoyo Co.) with a precision of 0.01 mm and capable of measuring to two decimal places (0.01 mm) , Japan) and an adjustable table, whereby each three-dimensional point is provided as a number and can be measured (FIGS. 3A and 3B).

<2-2> Setting the reference plane, baseline, and reference point

In order to standardize the model measurement, the reference plane was set by adjusting the adjustment table so that the incisal apilla and the hamular notch had the same height, that is, the same Z coordinate, within an error range of 0.01 mm.

Before setting the measurement point, the reference line was vertically set as the reference vertical line and the horizontally intersecting line as the reference horizontal line along the line connecting the incision nipple and the palatal midpalatal suture (Fig. 4). . The vertical line is ① line connecting the incisor nipple and palatal medial suture line, ② line connecting the alveolar ridge crest (Line R), ③ the deepest part of the margin (Line B), and ④ Line M It consists of a bisector line (Line A) between Line B. The horizontal line is a line that crosses Line M and divides the front and back distances from the incisor nipple to the line connecting the two pterygoid scars (1/4 line, 2/4 line, 3/4, 4/4 line) and bisected lines (1/8 line) between the incisal papilla and quarter line.

In order to set the reference point, the intersection measurement measured X, Y, and Z coordinates by using a three-dimensional measuring device where the horizontal lines and the vertical lines intersect. Platoons measured the three inflection points of the platoons, and buccal frenums were measured in clear cases and, in two cases, more pronounced platoons. In particular, the value of the line measurement item (FIG. 5) among the items measured by this statistical data was used for tray manufacture.

<2-3> Statistical processing and analysis

Statistical analysis and analysis were performed to determine the premeasurement value, measurement ratio, and angle for the evaluation of maxillary alveolar alveolar uterus, and according to the mean value of each item (male and female t-test), horizontal, sagittal, Morphological evaluation and classification were performed on the frontal plane. For this purpose, K-means clustering, ANOVA test, and post-mortem analysis (Duncan's test) were used. Horizontal morphology was performed using visual classification. In platoon analysis, the mean and width of naval platoons and buccal platoons were averaged. For the buccal platoons, the average position and the angle of travel were examined. In order to produce a tray for the total denture impression, the horizontal item of the margin is important, and considering the problem that is caused by the small tray clinically, the maximum and minimum changes of the horizontal item of the margin are investigated, and the most After the items with large line measurement value were examined, the items for size classification were set based on them, and then the size classification was performed based on this. The mean value of each item according to the size group was obtained. The difference between the groups and the post analysis were statistically processed in the same way as the shape classification.

<2-4> Measurement by measurement item

The following measurement items were measured using the three-dimensional measurement coordinates of the intersection points.

<2-4-1> Line measurement item

The widths of the margins and the alveolar widths were obtained at 1/8, 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 baselines, respectively. In this case, the border width is ① B 1/8 W, ② B 1/4 W, ③ B 2/4 W, ④ B 3/4 W, and the ridge crest width is ① R 1 / 8 W, ② R 1/4 W, ③ R 2/4 W, ④ R 3/4 W, ⑤ R 4/4 W. In addition, the length of the front and rear (length) was obtained from the 1/8, 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, 4/4 reference line perpendicular to the line between the two pterygium incision in the incisor nipple, ① 1/8 H, ② 1/4 H, ③ 2/4 H, ④ 3 / 4H, ⑤ 4/4 H. The border depth is calculated from the depth of the measurement point as the distance from the reference horizontal plane, which is ① B ant. D (measured using the inflection point of the base platoon), ② B 1/8 D, ③ B 1/4 D, ④ B 2/4 D, ⑤ B 3/4 D. The height of the ridge crest was calculated from the depth of the measuring point as the distance from the reference horizontal plane, which is ① R 1/8 D, ② R 1/4 D, ③ R 2/4 D, ④ R 3/4 D Represented by. The border-ridge crest depth at the margin was measured by the vertical depth value from the margin to the alveolar, which is ① BR 1/8 D, ② BR 1/4 D, ③ BR 2/4 D, ④ BR 3/4 D. The palatal vault depth was calculated as the distance from the reference horizontal plane using the measuring points of Line M and Line A. Line M is ① M 1/4 D, ② M 2/4 D, ③ M 3/4 D, ④ M 4/4 D, and Line A is shown as ① A 1/4 D, ② A 2/4 D, ③ A 3/4 D, ④ A 4/4 D.

Thereby, the average of the line measurement item measured values was calculated (Table 1).

Average of linear measurements: depth, width, distance male female system male female system Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD M1 / 8D 1.77 ± 1.31 1.89 ± 1.04 1.83 ± 1.17 M1 / 8W 23.61 ± 3.19 24.13 ± 2.81 23.88 ± 3.00 M1 / 4D 5.26 ± 2.00 5.56 ± 1.81 5.42 ± 1.90 M1 / 4W 33.78 ± 3.04 34.31 ± 2.69 34.06 ± 2.86 M2 / 4D 10.01 ± 2.01 9.91 ± 2.23 9.95 ± 2.34 M2 / 4W 43.68 ± 3.21 44.52 ± 2.93 44.12 ± 3.08 M3 / 4D 10.66 ± 2.36 10.15 ± 2.11 10.39 ± 2.24 M3 / 4W 48.51 ± 3.28 49.33 ± 3.24 48.94 ± 3.27 M4 / 4D * 818 ± 1.87 7.49 ± 1.63 7.82 ± 1.77 H-N W 47.45 ± 2.82 47.62 ± 2.76 47.54 ± 2.78 A1 / 4D * 3.11 ± 1.57 3.79 ± 1.72 3.47 ± 1.68 B1 / 8W * 35.52 ± 5.60 32.64 ± 5.10 33.87 ± 5.48 A2 / 4D 6.64 ± 1.77 6.73 ± 1.77 6.69 ± 1.76 B1 / 4W 46.68 ± 4.53 45.28 ± 3.77 45.94 ± 4.19 A3 / 4D 7.02 ± 1.78 6.98 ± 1.56 7.00 ± 1.66 B2 / 4W 58.60 ± 5.31 58.09 ± 4.31 58.33 ± 4.80 A4 / 4D 5.42 ± 1.71 5.20 ± 1.35 5.31 ± 1.53 B3 / 4W 63.81 ± 4.97 63.25 ± 4.26 63.52 ± 4.60 R1 / 8D 0.65 ± 1.18 0.82 ± 1.05 0.74 ± 1.11 R1 / 8L 46.29 ± 3.40 45.80 ± 3.10 46.03 ± 3.24 R1 / 4D 0.80 ± 1.34 0.87 ± 1.19 0.84 ± 1.26 R1 / 4L 49.68 ± 3.66 48.97 ± 2.86 49.61 ± 3.27 R2 / 4D 1.59 ± 1.57 1.16 ± 1.30 1.36 ± 1.45 D: depth (mm) W: width (mm) L: front and rear distance (mm) *: effective difference according to gender (P <0.05) R3 / 4D * 1.26 ± 1.22 0.30 ± 1.26 0.76 ± 1.33 B ant D 9.70 ± 2.84 10.19 ± 2.29 9.95 ± 2.56 B1 / 8D 11.71 ± 2.64 12.00 ± 2.40 11.86 ± 2.51 B1 / 4D 9.94 ± 2.40 10.05 ± 2.54 10.00 ± 2.46 B2 / 4D 8.35 ± 2.32 7.97 ± 1.87 8.15 ± 2.10 B3 / 4D * 9.85 ± 1.97 9.15 ± 1.77 9.48 ± 1.89 B-R1 / 8D 11.06 ± 2.19 11.19 ± 2.26 11.13 ± 2.21 B-R1 / 4D 9.14 ± 1.93 9.18 ± 2.48 9.16 ± 2.23 B-R2 / 4D 6.76 ± 2.03 6.81 ± 1.91 6.79 ± 1.96 B-R3 / 4D 8.59 ± 2.19 8.84 ± 2.21 8.72 ± 2.19

As shown in Table 1 above, the average of the line measurement items is the remaining 29 There was no significant difference between males and females (P <0.05).

<2-4-2> Angle of horizontal plane, sagittal plane and frontal plane (FIG. 6)

In this case, the horizontal angle is indicated by the border angle item ① B 1/8 A, ② B 1/4 A, ③ B 2/4 A, ④ B 3/4 A, ⑤ B 4/4 A The items (ridge crest angle) are represented by ① R 1/8 A, ② R 1/4 A, ③ R 2/4 A, ④ R 3/4 A, ⑤ R 4/4 A. The viewing angle is ① 0-1 A, ② 1-2 A, ③ 2-3 A, ④ 3-4 A, ⑤ 0-1-2 A, ⑥ 1-2-3 A, ⑦ 2-3-4 A , ⑧ 0-3-4 A, and the frontal angle is shown as ① AMA 2/4 A, ② AMA 3/4 A, ③ MAB 2/4 A, and ④ MAB 3/4 A.

In addition, the measurement ratio calculated | required the ratio between line measurement items in the horizontal plane and the frontal plane. At this time, the horizontal plane is the ratio between width ① R 8: 3 Ra. (Ridge 1/8 line width: 3/4 line width Ratio), ② R 1: 3 Ra. (Ridge 1/4 line width: 3/4 line width ratio), ③ R 2: 3 Ra. (Ridge 2/4 line width: 3/4 line width Ratio), ④ R 4: 3 Ra. (Ridge 4/4 line width: 3/4 line width Ratio), ⑤ B 8: 3 Ra. (Border 1/8 line width: 3/4 line width Ratio), ⑥ B 1: 3 Ra. (Border 1/4 line width: 3/4 line width Ratio), ⑦ B 2: 3 Ra. (Border 2/4 line width: 3/4 line width Ratio), ⑧ B 4: 3 Ra. (Border 4/4 line width: 3/4 line width Ratio) ① R 1/8 LW Ra. (Ridge 1/8 line length: width Ratio), ② R 1/4 LW Ra. (Ridge 1/8 line length: width Ratio), ③ R 2/4 LW Ra. (Ridge 1/8 line length: width Ratio), ④ R 3/4 LW Ra. (Ridge 1/8 line length: width Ratio), ⑤ HN LW Ra. (4/4 line length: width Ratio), ⑥ B 1 / 8 LW Ra. (Border 1/8 line length: width Ratio), ⑦ B 1/4 LW Ra. (Border 1/8 line length: width Ratio), ⑧ B 2/4 LW Ra. (Border 1/8 line len gth: width ratio), ⑨ B 3/4 LW Ra. (Border 1/8 line length: width Ratio). The front-to-surface ratio was expressed as ① 2/4 D: W Ra. (2/4 line depth: width Ratio), ② 2/4 D: W Ra (2/4 line depth: width Ratio). .

<2-5> Morphological Classification by Visual Classification

<2-5-1> Classification in horizontal plane

Five dentists with 5 years or more of clinical experience visually classify clinical V, O, and U types, and then statistically process the model classified four or more times as the basis for horizontal classification. It was.

As a result, 52 models (42.6%) were classified in the same form more than four times, and the remaining 70 (57.4%) were distributed in various ways (Table 2).

Clinical form distribution Clinical form Cumulative number ratio(%) V type 9 7.4 O type 9 7.4 U type 34 27.9 system 52 42.6 Unclassified 70 57.4

Unclassified: the same form appears no more than 4 times

In addition, the differences among the measurement items among the clinical classification groups showed differences in alveolar items rather than marginal items as a result of variance analysis (Table 3). It was confirmed that the clinical classification by the naked eye was based on alveolar rather than margin.

Comparison of measurements of angles and ratios by clinical type in the horizontal plane (using ANOVA analysis) Sig. Sig. R 1/8 A 0.021 * B 1/8 A 0.021 * R 1/4 A 0.001 * B 1/4 A 0.012 * R 2/4 A 0.010 * B 2/4 A 0.214 R 3/4 A 0.022 * B 3/4 A 0.052 R 4/4 A 0.088 B 4/4 A 0.271 R 8: 3 Ra. 0.000 * B 8: 3 Ra. 0.146 R 1: 3 Ra. 0.000 * B 1: 3 Ra. 0.000 * R 2: 3 Ra. 0.002 * B 2: 3 Ra. 0.001 * R 4: 3 Ra. 0.309 B 4: 3 Ra. 0.346 R 8: 1 Ra. 0.350 B 8: 1 Ra. 0.526 R 1/8 LW Ra. 0.001 * B 1/8 LW Ra. 0.023 * R 1/4 LW Ra. 0.000 * B 1/4 LW Ra. 0.012 * R 2/4 LW Ra. 0.010 * B 2/4 LW Ra. 0.215 R 3/4 LW Ra. 0.021 * B 3/4 LW Ra. 0.054 H-N LW Ra 0.0116

*: Significantly different (P <0.05)

The alveolar items (Table 3) showing the difference between the measured items according to the above clinical classification were divided into front and rear alveolar items based on the reference horizontal line 2/4 line. The 6 items that showed differences in R1 / 8A, R1 / 4A, R8: 3Ra., R1: 3Ra., R1 / 8LW Ra., R1 / 4LW Ra. According to the Duncan's test, we found no difference between clinical type O and U. Clinical type V was different from clinical type O and U. Ovoid arches and T-shaped tapered arches (FIG. 7).

Therefore, all three items were classified into ovoid (O) type and taper (T) type by using the anterior items 6 items.

Among the items of the posterior alveolar item, there were 2 items which showed the difference between the clinical classification groups. R3 / 4A and R3 / 4LW Ra. The Duncan's test was performed to find out the differences between the groups. As a result, there was a difference between clinical type O and type U, and morphologically, it could be classified into wide (W) arch and narrow (N) arch in the posterior 3/4 horizontal baseline region (FIG. 7). ). Clinical type V was distributed in various types between W and N. Therefore, we classified the whole type into W-type and N-type by using the rear items that showed differences among the groups in the visual classification.

In this way, the types classified by the front and rear alveolar items were classified into four types (TW, TN, OW, ON type) by combining them, and as a result, the OW type was most distributed with 33%. TW was the least distributed (11%) (Table 4).

Distribution of total sample in each of the four forms shape male female system T-W 6 (5%) 8 (6%) 14 (11%) T-N 20 (16%) 13 (11%) 33 (27%) O-W 14 (12%) 26 (21%) 40 (33%) O-N 18 (15%) 17 (14%) 35 (29%) system 58 (48%) 64 (52%) 122 (100%)

The sixth order equation was obtained using the average value of the ratio items of the alveolar for each of the four forms (Figs. 8A to 8D). As a result, 94% or more of averages could be expressed. The classification of V, O, and U by the naked eye was only suitable for the classification of some models with characteristics, and based on this, the whole classification was based on the items showing possible differences.

<2-5-2> Cleft palate in sagittal plane

The palatal inclination of the palate was examined using an angle item in the sagittal plane cut off the central baseline. K-means clustering was performed in three forms (steep, mildly inclined, and flat) according to the inclination using the angle item for the inclination from the front to the back. 51.6%), steep (39.3%), and flat (9.0%), followed by post-analysis 0-1-2 A (1/4 line in incision nipple, 2/4). Except for the angle shifted to the line, all items showed differences between the forms (Fig. 9 and Table 5). The angle shifted from the anterior part of the sagittal plane to the rear was correlated with the alveolar height of the anterior part, which was also correlated with the degree of absorption of the alveolar agent.

Classification of the palate in the sagittal plane group A (flat) B (mildly inclined) C (steep) 0-1 A 10.29 22.81 30.72 1-2 A 16.43 28.30 38.78 2-3 A 9.37 3.68 -1.49 0-1-2 A 185.27 185.50 188.06 1-2-3 A 174.07 155.38 139.72 percent 9.0% 51.6% 39.3%

<2-5-3> Cleft palate in frontal plane

Three types of cluster analysis were performed on the frontal planes cut from the horizontal reference lines 2/4 and 3/4 using angle and ratio items.As a result, the angles centered on the median suture line (AMA 2/4, 3 / 4 A), the AMA 2/4 A, 3/4 A average angles of 127.03˚ and 133.13˚ were V-arch, 144.48˚, and 148.27˚ O-arch, 161.11˚ , 157.89˚ was named U-arch. Distribution of each form was distributed in the order of O-arch (41.0%), U-arch (39.3%), V-arch (19.7%) (Fig. 10 and Table 6). As a result of examining the ratio of depth to alveolar width, V-type showed deep and narrow palate.

Classification of the palatal arch form on the frontal plane group A (V type) B (O type) C (U type) AMA 3/4 A 133.13 148.27 157.89 AMA 2/4 A 127.03 144.48 161.11 3/4 MAB A 178.50 169.95 162.93 2/4 MAB A 184.29 173.02 162.05 3/4 D: W Ra 0.25 0.21 0.19 2/4 D: W Ra 0.27 0.22 0.20 percent 19.7% 41.0% 39.3%

<2-6> Platoon Analysis

The base and the three inflection points of the platoon were measured to determine the width and length. In the buccal platoon, the relative front-back position and the running direction of the plaque were examined (Fig. 11 and Table 7).

As a result, the length of the labial plaque was 6.55 mm in average, and the width was longer in average at 4.60 mm. In addition, the average length of the buccal platoon was 5.31 mm, the width was 7.12 mm, and the width was larger, and the average position of the buccal platoon was measured statistically. The average position was located at 0.32 region from the front, and the average position was 0.36 region based on the front and rear length of the margin. In addition, the driving angle of the buccal platoon was centrifugally traveling at 82.57 degrees with respect to the two inflection bases of the platoon.

Anatomically, the buccal platoon originated from the premolar and reportedly progressed to the modiulus site (Hicky, JC et. Al. , BOUCHER'S Prosthodontic Treatment for dental Patients , St. Louis, The CV Mosby Co., 1975 ), The position and angle of the buccal platoon are important factors in the manufacture of the tray.

Platoon analysis (width, length, angle, position) male female system Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD La. W 4.58 ± 0.83 4.61 ± 0.70 4.60 ± 0.76 La. L 6.65 ± 2.04 6.47 ± 1.59 6.55 ± 1.81 Bu. W 7.01 ± 1.37 7.22 ± 1.15 7.12 ± 1.25 Bu. L 5.61 ± 2.42 5.04 ± 1.22 5.31 ± 1.89 Bu. A 83.59 ± 36.9 81.70 ± 11.1 82.57 ± 26.1 Position (R) 0.32 ± 0.06 0.31 ± 0.32 0.32 ± 0.06 Position (B) 0.37 ± 0.05 0.36 ± 0.36 0.36 ± 0.06

Position (R): relative position in the alveolar 4/4 length

* Position (B): relative position at 4/4 of the margin

There is no effective difference according to gender (P <0.05)

<2-7> Classification according to size

In order to produce a tray for the total denture impression, the horizontal part of the margin is important, and considering the problem that is caused by the small tray clinically, the maximum and minimum variation of the horizontal part of the margin is investigated, and the largest After the items showing the line measurement value were examined, the items for size classification were set based on the size classification.

The item showing the range of maximum and minimum changes in the horizontal item was the marginal 3/4 width (Table 8).

Width, length range in horizontal plane Range (mm) Range (mm) M1 / 4W 15.61 B1 / 4W 22.27 M2 / 4W 15.66 B2 / 4W 22.42 M3 / 4W 17.33 B3 / 4W 22.50 H-N W 16.96 R4 / 4L 17.20 B4 / 4L 15.36

In addition, the item showing the largest line measurement value among the horizontal items was the marginal width 3/4 (Table 1). Therefore, the horizontal factor is important in the impression for edentulous dentition, and the size classification was conducted centering on the marginal 3/4 width dimension (mean 63.52 mm, range 22.50 mm).

Size classification was performed in 4 mm increments from the average of 3/4 width margins, considering the effect of the thickness of the impression material on the accuracy of the impression and the impression material thickness at the margin. Size 2 (57.5-61.5 ㎜), size 3 (61.5-65.5 ㎜), size 4 (65.5-69.5 ㎜), size 5 (69.5 ㎜ or more), and size 3 were the most distributed (Table 9 ).

Distribution of each of the five size groups (classified as B 3/4 W) male female system(%) 57.5 or less 5 6 11 (9%) 57.5-61.5 17 17 34 (28%) 61.5-65.5 16 20 36 (29%) 65.5-69.5 11 17 28 (23%) 69.5 or more 9 4 13 (11%) system 58 64 122 (100%)

The average of vertical items by size group was calculated (Table 10), and variance analysis was performed to determine the difference of vertical items between size groups. There were no differences among the size groups in the remaining items (P <0.05). As a result, it was confirmed that the difference in width was more than the difference in depth. However, in the depth of the palate, there were differences between the groups at depths of 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 (P <0.05), and the aspect of the difference was significant in the size 5 (69.5 mm or more) group ( 12). However, it was confirmed that the difference in width was greater than the difference in palatal depth items.

Depth measurements in each of the five arch size groups (classified as B 3/4 W) Average D: Depth (mm) Average D: Depth (mm) 57.5 or less 57.5-61.5 61.5- 65.5 65.5- 69.5 69.5 or more system 57.5 or less 57.5-61.5 61.5- 65.5 65.5-69.5 69.5 or more system M1 / 8D 1.78 1.69 1.80 1.91 2.18 1.83 R1 / 8D 0.90 0.78 0.77 0.61 0.69 0.74 M1 / 4D 5.36 4.98 5.36 5.48 6.65 5.45 R1 / 4D 1.27 0.96 0.73 0.67 0.83 0.84 M2 / 4D 9.43 9.20 10.03 9.92 12.23 9.95 R2 / 4D 2.03 1.52 1.12 10.17 1.46 1.36 M3 / 4D 9.26 9.54 10.71 10.39 12.67 10.39 R3 / 4D 1.67 1.00 0.45 0.59 0.57 0.76 M4 / 4D 6.92 7.22 8.16 7.77 9.56 7.82 B ant D 7.63 6.66 7.54 7.88 8.37 7.47 A1 / 4D 3.62 3.12 3.70 3.39 3.78 3.47 B1 / 8D 11.86 11.20 12.02 12.02 12.86 11.86 A2 / 4D 6.31 5.97 7.08 6.87 7.43 6.69 B1 / 4D 9.95 9.22 10.36 10.20 10.62 10.00 A3 / 4D 6.29 6.21 7.54 6.87 8.46 7.00 B2 / 4D 8.40 7.71 8.01 8.08 9.62 8.15 A4 / 4D 4.50 4.70 5.87 5.01 6.66 5.31 B3 / 4D 9.29 9.03 93.46 9.41 11.01 9.48 B-R1 / 8D 10.97 10.42 11.25 11.41 12.17 11.13 B-R1 / 4D 8.68 8.26 9.63 9.53 9.79 9.16 B-R2 / 4D 6.37 6.19 6.89 6.91 8.16 6.79 B-R3 / 4D 7.62 8.03 9.01 8.82 10.44 8.72

As a result of variance analysis (Table 12) to find the mean of the horizontal items according to the size group (Table 11), and to find the difference of the horizontal items according to the size group (Table 12), there was a difference in all the horizontal items (P <0.05). ), The pattern of difference was examined using a post hoc analysis. As a result, the alveolar and marginal components shifted from 1/8 width to 3/4 width, and there was a marked difference in size group, and from 3/4 width to 4/4 width As we implemented, the gaps again diminished. In addition, the difference in size by the size of the margin was more apparent than the alveolar agent. On the other hand, as a result of the post analysis of the length item, the difference between the size group for the length by the difference in the size group in the width component was not clear (Table 13).

Width and length measurements in each of the five arch size groups (classified as B 3/4 W) W: Width diameter (mm) Average L: Front and back length (mm) 57.5 or less 57.5-61.5 61.5-65.5 65.5-69.5 69.5 or more system M1 / 8W 22.80 22.79 24.00 24.63 25.72 23.88 M1 / 4W 31.98 32.37 34.88 35.16 36.96 34.06 M2 / 4W 40.42 42.00 44.50 45.80 48.16 44.12 M3 / 4W 44.40 46.88 48.94 51.58 52.48 48.94 H-N W 44.19 46.69 47.75 49.47 48.68 47.54 B 1/8 W 30.18 33.47 32.42 34.85 39.92 33.87 B 1 / 4W 42.27 44.13 45.15 47.47 52.71 45.94 B 2 / 4W 52.43 54.82 58.16 60.72 67.83 58.33 B 3 / 4W 55.96 59.75 63.42 67.38 71.70 63.52 R 4/4 L 45.18 43.64 46.68 46.63 49.96 46.03 B 4/4 L 47.79 47.21 49.55 49.95 54.03 49.30

ANOVA analysis of width and length measurements by size group Sig. Sig. R 1/8 W 0.011 * B 1/8 W 0.000 * R 1/4 W 0.000 * B 1/4 W 0.000 * R 2/4 W 0.000 * B 2/4 W 0.000 * R 3/4 W 0.000 * B 3/4 W 0.000 * H-N W 0.000 * R 4/4 L 0.000 * B 4/4 L 0.000 *

Effective difference (P <0.05)

Various comparisons of width and length by size group R 1/8 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 22.79 A 57.5-61.5 22.80 A 61.5-65.5 24.00 A B 65.5-69.5 24.64 A B 69.5 or more 25.71 B R 1/4 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 31.98 A 57.5-61.5 32.37 A 61.5-65.5 34.38 B 65.5-69.5 35.16 B 69.5 or more 36.96 C R 2/4 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 40.42 A 57.5-61.5 42.00 A B 61.5-65.5 44.50 C 65.5-69.5 45.80 C 69.5 or more 48.16 D R 3/4 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 44.40 A 57.5-61.5 46.88 B 61.5-65.5 48.93 C 65.5-69.5 51.58 D 69.5 or more 52.48 D

B 1/8 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 30.18 A 57.5-61.5 32.42 A B 61.5-65.5 33.47 A B 65.5-69.5 34.85 B 69.5 or more 39.92 C B 1/4 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 42.27 A 57.5-61.5 44.13 A B 61.5-65.5 45.15 B 65.5-69.5 47.47 C 69.5 or more 52.71 D B 2/4 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 52.43 A 57.5-61.5 54.82 B 61.5-65.5 58.16 C 65.5-69.5 60.72 D 69.5 or more 67.83 E B 3/4 W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 55.96 A 57.5-61.5 59.75 B 61.5-65.5 63.42 C 65.5-69.5 67.38 D 69.5 or more 71.70

H-N W Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 44.19 A 57.5-61.5 46.69 B 61.5-65.5 47.45 B C 65.5-69.5 48.68 C D 69.5 or more 49.47 D

R 4/4 L Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 43.64 A 57.5-61.5 45.18 A B 61.5-65.5 46.63 B 65.5-69.5 46.68 B 69.5 or more 49.96 C B 4/4 L Average (mm) Duncan's grouping 57.5 or less 47.21 A 57.5-61.5 47.79 A 61.5-65.5 49.55 B 65.5-69.5 49.95 B 69.5 or more 54.03 C

There is no effective difference with the average of the same values (P <0.05)

In addition, a graph in which the width items according to the size groups were compared and synthesized was created (FIGS. 13A and 13B).

The results of the above example are summarized as follows.

1) There were significant differences in all areas of alveolar width (P <0.05).

2) Significant differences were found in all areas of margin width (P <0.05).

3) There were significant differences (P <0.05) only in 2 / 4D, 3 / 4D, and 4 / 4D among the palatal depth items.

4) There was significant difference (P <0.05) in B 3 / 4D among marginal and alveolar depth items, and there was no difference in other items.

As described above, it was found that the size classification centered on the marginal 3/4 width diameter appeared appropriately centered on the width item.

Example 3 Mandibular Edentulous Measurement

<3-1> Measuring method

The model where the reference plane is determined is moved parallel to the base plate to the position where it can be measured, and the reference point that is the reference point of all measurement points is set at this position. This reference point was set to the foremost point (1 in Fig. 1) where the midline and the anterior buccal buccal margin meet. Place the measuring needle at the end of the vertical arm with the depth gauge attached to this reference point, zero-adjust so that each of the three meter readings (XY Z) has a value of '0.00' and then set the reference point. The values of X, Y, and Z were measured sequentially from 1) to 39), and the respective measured values were input to a computer (EXCEL, IBM compatible 586). Through the respective measured values, the following line measurement, angle measurement, and ratio between line measurement items were calculated.

<3-2> measurement result

After displaying 39 reference points in 100 models of 50 males and 50 females each set in Example <1-1-2>, the coordinate values of X, Y, and Z of each reference point are measured using a 3D measuring instrument. The ratio between line measurement items, each measurement item, and line measurement items was obtained as a reference. The mean and standard deviation of these values are presented in Table 14 and Table 15.

Each measurement of the periodontal arch  Measure male female system Average S.D. Average S.D. Average S.D. 2. Angle Unit: degree AA 137.08 8.66 136.86 8.78 136.97 8.68 LA 139.06 4.84 139.91 5.26 139.49 5.05 AA2A 88.48 4.69 89.37 5.52 88.93 5.12 AA3A 78.41 4.25 79.25 4.70 78.83 4.48 AA4A 69.02 4.13 69.85 4.27 69.44 4.20

Each measurement of 2-ratio of the periodontal arch  Measure male female system Average S.D. Average S.D. Average S.D. 2-ratio No unit W1R 0.43 0.06 0.42 0.07 0.42 0.07 W2R 0.71 0.04 0.71 0.04 0.71 0.04 W4R 0.89 0.03 0.89 0.03 0.89 0.03 WL1R 0.43 0.07 0.44 0.09 0.44 0.08 WL2R 0.51 0.04 0.51 0.05 0.51 0.05 WL3R 0.61 0.05 0.61 0.05 0.61 0.05 WL4R 0.73 0.06 0.72 0.06 0.72 0.06

In order to examine the significant difference between male and female in each measurement item, the male and female mean and standard deviation of the ratios between 34 line items, 5 each item and 7 line items were calculated. The differences between male and female were compared.

Of 34 line items, total anterior and posterior length (male average: 50.84, female average: 49.85, total average: 50.34 mm), 3/4 width between left and right adjustment (male average: 51.47, female average: 51.06, total average: 51.27 ㎜) and 4/4 left and right teeth adjustment (male mean: 57.76, female mean: 57.38, total mean: 57.57 mm) showed significant differences according to male and female sex (p ≤ 0.05).

<3-3> Classification and Results Analysis of Alveolar Palace

Among all line measurement items, the difference between the maximum value and the minimum value (minimum value: 45.58 mm, maximum value: 66.87 mm, average value: 57.57 mm, and maximum minimum range: 21.29 mm) is the largest item. It was determined as a baseline to classify the size of alveolar uterus. This study examined how the size groups of the alveolar uterus categorized correlated with other measurement items. First, in order to classify the size of alveolar uterus, 57.57 mm, which is the average value of the width between the 4/4 left and right teeth adjustments, was used as the median of classification, and each group was classified at 4 mm intervals. In this case, the value of 4 mm is when the thickness of the impression material capable of the most precise reproduction of the irreversible aqueous colloid impression material is 4 to 6 mm. According to the calculation, the width between 4/4 adjustments is 1 group (48 mm or less), 2 groups (48 to 52 mm), 3 groups (52 to 56 mm), 4 groups (56 to 60 mm), 5 groups ( 60-64 mm) and 6 groups (64 mm or more).

The distribution of each of the six groups was the highest in 51 groups of 56 to 60 mm, with 23 patients in group 3 (52 to 56 mm), 18 groups for group 5 (60 to 64 mm), 1 group and 2 groups. (48 mm or less, 48 to 52 mm) and 3 persons and 6 groups (64 mm and more), respectively, in the order of 2 people, and they show a normal distribution curve (Table 16).

Distribution of Male, Female, and Total Testers in Each Arch Size Group Arch size Unit: mm male female system Row (%) Col (%) Layer (%) Count Row (%) Col (%) Layer (%) Count Row (%) Col (%) Layer (%) Count To 48 100.0 6.0 3.0 3 - - - - 100.0 3.0 3.0 3 48-52 33.3 2.0 1.0 One 66.7 4.0 2.0 2 100.0 3.0 3.0 3 52-56 43.5 20.0 10.0 10 56.5 26.0 13.0 13 100.0 23.0 23.0 23 56-60 43.1 44.0 22.0 22 56.9 58.0 29.0 29 100.0 51.0 51.0 51 60-64 66.7 24.0 12.0 12 33.3 12.0 6.0 6 100.0 18.0 18.0 18 64 ~ 100.0 4.0 2.0 2 - - - - 100.0 2.0 2.0 2 system 50.0 100.0 50.0 50 50.0 100.0 50.0 50 100.0 100.0 100.0 100

In order to divide all the models into six groups and to make trays based on these, the average measurement item values of each group were needed and measured (Table 17 and Table 18).

Average value of length measurements for each of six size groups          AW4 Measurement Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6  system 48 mm 48-52 mm 52-56 mm 56-60 mm 60-64 mm 64 mm 1. Back and forth distance Unit: mm AW1 21.93 20.77 24.44 24.54 24.37 25.03 24.31 AW2 32.43 34.08 39.98 41.37 42.55 46.45 40.87 AW3 39.79 43.80 49.30 51.75 54.77 58.66 51.27 AW4 46.39 50.16 54.75 58.13 61.79 65.83 57.57 ABH 3.86 7.98 7.96 5.92 6.55 3.24 6.45 ALH 3.42 5.21 4.45 3.42 3.48 1.76 3.69 ABH1 6.34 8.71 7.41 5.37 4.56 2.84 5.77 ABH2 4.43 7.54 5.47 3.70 2.32 -0.60 3.91 ABH3 1.57 4.96 1.65 -0.24 -1.46 -3.98 0.11 ABH4 -0.28 0.63 -2.12 -2.87 -3.17 -4.42 -2.60 ALH2 4.85 6.57 7.12 6.53 5.68 5.08 6.43 ALH3 7.00 9.63 9.22 8.48 8.45 5..99 8.59

Average value of length and angle measurements for each of the six size groups          AW4 Measurement Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 system 48 mm 48-52 mm 52-56 mm 56-60 mm 60-64 mm 64 mm 1.length Unit: mm AP 36.20 36.72 40.69 42.05 42.84 45.28 41.61 TAP 44.21 48.01 50.51 50.53 50.83 51.88 50.34 BW1 36.61 38.71 43.18 42.74 43.53 47.07 42.76 BW2 49.67 53.52 58.55 59.28 61.30 66.63 59.16 BW3 63.36 53.86 69.87 70.40 73.36 79.02 70.28 BW4 65.69 68.57 70.37 71.04 73.75 77.69 71.27 LW2 22.33 19.89 23.24 24.75 25.64 31.23 24.47 LW3 30.06 31.24 32.99 34.93 36.18 42.33 34.60 LW4 35.02 36.17 39.77 41.35 43.37 49.29 41.16 PLW 41.99 43.62 48.57 49.75 52.34 56.26 49.66 PW 50.18 52.95 56.87 59.22 61.26 64.54 58.69 ALH4 11.48 10.76 13.32 14.08 15.43 13.78 13.96 PALH 14.89 13.04 17.62 19.44 20.80 19.69 18.94 AABW 5.48 4.78 5.29 5.61 6.00 6.30 5.59 AALW 4.26 5.78 5.23 4.92 5.34 3.92 5.05 ABW2 8.62 9.72 9.29 8.96 9.37 10.09 9.14 ABW3 11.79 5.03 10.28 9.33 9.30 10.18 9.50 ABW4 9.65 9.21 7.81 6.45 5.98 5.93 6.85 ALW2 5.05 7.10 8.37 8.31 8.46 7.61 8.20 ALW3 4.86 6.28 8.16 8.41 9.29 8.17 8.33 ALW4 5.68 7.00 7.49 8.39 9.21 8.27 8.20 2.each Unit: degree AA 143.81 134.32 136.34 136.83 137.59 135.88 136.97 ABA 127.22 129.35 129.30 127.31 127.29 128.56 127.85 LA 132.35 140.88 138.30 139.55 141.39 142.99 139.49 AA2 83.81 85.96 88.94 89.07 89.54 91.51 88.93 AA3 72.60 77.19 77.95 78.83 80.96 81.64 78.83 AA4 65.43 68.90 68.00 69.44 71.73 72.08 69.44

Looking at the mean value of each measurement item according to each group, as the classification group of alveolar uterus increased in the anterior-and-rear length category, the anterior-and-forth-length item also increased in proportion to the width between the 4/4 tooth adjustments of the alveolar arch. Also, as the size of alveolar uterus increased, the left and right width items also increased proportionally, although there were some exceptions.

The results of observing the size and shape of the Korean mandibular alveolar alveolar uterus, 50 males and 50 females, are as follows.

1. As a result of measuring the mean and standard deviation of the line measurement items, 1) the total front and rear length (TAP), ② the width between 3/4 left and right adjustment (AW3) and ③ the width between 4/4 left and right adjustment (AW4). There were significant differences according to male and female genders only in the branches (p ≤ 0.05).

2. The size of the alveolar uterus is not the change of front and rear (minimum value 31.52 mm, maximum value 48.36 mm, average value 41.30 mm), but the change of the left and right width, especially the baseline (4/4 width between the left and right posterior nodules); 45.58 mm, maximum value 66.87 mm, average value 57.57 mm), showing the largest change, which could be used as a baseline for tray size classification.

3. The size of the tray is 48 mm or less, 48 to 52 mm, 52 divided by 4 mm intervals around the 58 mm (average 57.57 mm) distance of the anterior line (width between 4/4 left and right teeth adjustment) at the anterior and left posterior nodules. It can classify into six groups more than -56 mm, 56-60 mm, 60-64 mm, and 64 mm.

4. The average length of each group classified by front and rear length and width of left and right buccal margins were classified using the distance between right and left posterior nodules (width between 4/4 left and right adjustment).

5. There were 56 models (V--15, O-13, and U-28) of the mandibular alveolar arches that could be visually classified, and 44 could not be clearly distinguished.

6. The classification of mandibular alveolar uterus using the results of analysis by visual classification was classified into V type (29), O type (44) and U type (27). There was no significant difference between O type and U type.

7. The types of alveolar dentition were classified into 23 types V-T, 18 types V-S, 28 types O-T, and 31 types O-S.

<3-4> Classification of Mandibles

The difference between the maximum value and the minimum value (minimum value: 45.58 mm, maximum value: 66.87 mm, average value: 57.57 mm, and maximum minimum range: 21.29 mm) among all line measurement items of the statistical data performed in the above <3-2>. Was the item of 'width between 4/4 left and right teeth adjustment' and it was set as a standard to classify the size of alveolar arch. First, in order to classify the size of alveolar uterus, the median value of 57.57 mm, which is the mean value of the width between 4/4 left and right teeth adjustment, was classified into 4 mm intervals. At this time, the value of 4 mm is the thickness of the most accurate replica of the irreversible aqueous colloid impression material is 4 ~ 6 mm and it is calculated as the range of 4 mm when calculated to both sides because there is a stable range of 2 mm in each side Depending on it was divided into six groups. All models were divided into six groups and the average line item was calculated for each group.

<Example 4> Development and manufacture of a new maxillary edentulous tray

In order to make the tray of the maxillary tray more accurately and precisely, the alveolars of each size were reproduced three-dimensionally by using a CAD program based on the statistics on the shape of the maxillary alveolar alveolar of Koreans according to the above embodiment. The inner surface of the tray was designed with a space for the impression material 3 mm in three dimensions in the alveolar. The rest was then designed using a three-dimensional dedicated CAD / CAM system. Thereafter, aluminum blocks were cut by a CNC milling machine to produce trays having a thickness of 2 mm. Schreinemakers trays were used in the prepared trays and the conventional trays to compare the suitability of the existing main models. Newly developed trays were also used to check fitness in patients.

<4-1> 3D data calculation for maxillary tray

The data were calculated based on the study of the maxillary alveolar morphology of the Korean dentifrice. Specifically, the three-dimensional coordinates of each point were calculated from each line measurement item in five groups by setting the x- and y-axis as the reference plane, the plane passing through the incisor nipple and the pterygoid scars on both sides, and setting the x and y axes. (Figure 14)

<4-2> Modeling of the Archery for the Maxillary Tray

Using AutoCAD for PC (release 14.01, Autodesk Co.), points were plotted on the calculated three-dimensional coordinates, and splines were connected between these points, and the location and shape of the platoon were also designed based on statistics such as books. The wire framework modeling of the arch was completed by smooth transition with the rest (FIG. 15).

<4-3> Design of Maxillary Tray

The tray is designed to give an offset of 4 mm from the archery as a space for the impression body, and the aluminum alloy block is cut on a CNC milling machine to produce a tray with a thickness of 2 mm. The final decision was made and entered into the design. Surface modeling of the arch model was performed, and a wire framework of the inner surface of the tray was designed with a space of 4 mm in three dimensions. Using the finished framework, a tray with a thickness of 2 mm was designed by solid modeling using Cimatron 90 (version 9.0, Cimatron Co.), a three-dimensional CAD / CAM system. A slit-like hold and front handle were also designed (FIG. 16).

Computer-aided design / computer-aided manufacturing (CAD / CAM) systems support various technical activities from design to manufacturing based on the ability to represent and manipulate geometric shape information of objects. Computer application technology that streamlines the design and manufacturing process by managing information and facilitates communication among technicians. Specifically, CAD is used in the field of designing and drawing products, and CAM uses a computer in the field of production technology, which translates the specification of a given product into product information that can be accepted by the actual machine. will be. In other words, CAM refers to a computer software system that generates machining information for cutting on NC machines. The Cimatron 90 used in the present invention is a three-dimensional dedicated CAD / CAM system, which performs surface modeling and three-dimensional modeling on three-dimensional shapes, and calculates NC code and obtains a tool path from the VM82, a CNC milling machine. The direct processing was possible with this data.

CNC milling machines, on the other hand, are computerized numerically controlled milling machines that are typically used to directly cut metal or resin products designed in two or three dimensions in a CAD / CAM system. Three-dimensional curved shape requires three-dimensional curved control. In this case, manual motion control is impossible. Therefore, 3D cutting is only possible with specially functioned copy milling machines. Due to this difficulty of motion control, numerical control (NC) technology has been developed. In the present invention, using the numerical control technology, the tray can be designed into a three-dimensional curved shape by a statistical value and precisely processed.

<4-4> Maxillary Tray

Using Cimatron 90 (v.90), NC code was calculated from the designed tray and the tool path was obtained. CNC milling was performed using this VM82 (Sakasaki, Japan) milling machine (Table 19). The finished tray was polished by hand and finished. No further heat treatment or surface treatment was performed.

Characteristics of VM82 Milling Machine controller FANUC Series 16-M Processing range 820 × 620 × 370 (mm) Workpiece weight 160 kg Feed 1-5000 mm / Min Milling spindle 3.7 kW 12,000 R.P.M. Tool atc 8 EA Tool diameter (Max) 40 mm

<4-5> Statistical processing and analysis of fit of maxillary tray

All statistics were done using the Windows SPSS statistics program (release 8.0, SPSS, Chicago, IL). When using the existing model, in the existing tray and the newly developed tray, the total mean and standard deviation, and the mean and standard deviation of the impression thickness and the length, respectively, were calculated and plotted by box plots, respectively. The paired sample t-tests were performed on the P and .05 items for the and and length items to compare the goodness-of-fit with the existing model in the newly developed tray and the existing tray. In addition, the average and standard deviations, and the average and standard deviations of the thickness and length of the impressions obtained from clinically developed trays were calculated and plotted using box plots.

<4-6> Checking the fitness of the manufactured maxillary tray

The existing Schreinemakers system and the shape of the newly developed trays were visually observed and measured and compared.

<4-6-1> Visual observation and actual value comparison

In the newly developed tray and the conventional Schreinemakers tray, the anterior and posterior vertical heights, the left and right widths of the maxillary nodules, and the anteroposterior length on the midline were measured, respectively. .

As a result, the vertical height measurement of the tray shows that the newly developed tray is larger in the anterior part and similar or smaller in the posterior height of the posterior part (Table 20). In addition, the newly developed trays were found to be almost similar or slightly larger in left and right widths compared to conventional trays, while being smaller in front and rear lengths. This difference was large as the tray size increased. This difference was confirmed by visual observation.

In addition, the visual observation showed that the buccal platoon was located relatively further behind the newly developed tray.

Vertical height at the front part (mm) Vertical height at the rear part (mm) Horizontal width (mm) at B3 / 4 Sagittal length at centerline (mm) Width / length ratio Tray size New tray Old tray New tray Old tray New tray Old tray New tray Old tray New tray Old tray 1 (31) 13.5 11.5 13 13 62 60 51 51 1.22 1.18 2 (32) 13.5 12 13.5 13.5 65.5 65 52 53 1.26 1.23 3 (33) 14 12.5 14 14 70 68.5 53.5 57 1.31 1.20 4 (34) 14.5 13 14.5 15 73.5 72 54.5 59 1.35 1.22 5 (35) 14.5 13 14.5 15.5 78 79 58 64 1.35 1.23

<4-6-2> Checking Goodness of Fit with Existing Model

A final model or a duplicate model of 51 maxillary dentifrice patients who visited the Department of Prosthodontics, Kyung Hee University, was used. The impression of the model was obtained with and the newly developed tray. The size of the tray was selected according to the standard shown in Table 21. In order to use as the basis of the impression taking, three stops were formed to a thickness of 4 mm, and the impression material was mixed according to the manufacturer's instructions. The tray was placed until the stop reached, making the line connecting the pterygium notch on both sides coincide with the trailing edge of. 33 measurement points were set in the impression body thus obtained, and the thickness of the impression body was measured at the site using a periodontal probe and a ruler of 0.5 mm. In addition, the edge measurement point measured the distance between the tray edge and the impression edge. All of the impressions were taken and measured by one technician.

Choose the size of the newly designed tray Tray size WDB3 / 4 (mm) WTB3 / 4 (mm) One 57 or less 58.18 2 57-61 62.65 3 61-65 67.30 4 65-69 69.85 5 69-73 74.32

Width of the arch in the WDB3 / 4, B 3/4 site; Width of the inner surface of the tray at WTB3 / 4, B 3/4

In the impressions obtained using the existing model, the length from the impression edge to the tray margin was 4.72 ± 2.06 mm in the newly developed tray and 5.66 ± 3.44 mm in the existing tray, and the thickness of the impression was 4.01 ± 1.31 mm , 4.45 ± 2.36 mm in conventional trays (Table 22 and Table 23).

Impression thickness of existing tray and new tray (mm) New tray Old tray New tray Old tray part Mean ± S.D. mean ± S.D. Sig. part Mean ± S.D. mean ± S.D. Sig. B3 / 4 3.63 ± 1.19 2.88 ± 1.60 * R1 / 4 3.91 ± 1.28 4.68 ± 1.61 * B2 / 4 3.38 ± 1.32 2.50 ± 1.69 * R1 / 8 3.94 ± 1.21 4.43 ± 1.55 * B1 / 4 3.88 ± 1.45 5.26 ± 2.10 * IP 4.02 ± 0.72 3.92 ± 1.43 B1 / 8 3.94 ± 1.35 7.14 ± 2.00 * A4 / 4 4.49 ± 1.41 3.48 ± 1.56 * BA 4.55 ± 1.18 8.30 ± 1.86 * A3 / 4 4.17 ± 1.20 4.33 ± 1.59 BAM 4.18 ± 1.14 7.38 ± 2.21 * A2 / 4 3.93 ± 1.22 3.65 ± 1.44 F3 / 4 4.07 ± 1.26 3.73 ± 1.79 A1 / 4 3.96 ± 1.23 2.52 ± 1.39 * F2 / 4 3.57 ± 1.33 3.25 ± 1.95 M4 / 4 4.38 ± 1.58 3.42 ± 1.48 * F1 / 4 3.85 ± 1.50 5.22 ± 2.03 * M3 / 4 3.88 ± 1.55 3.92 ± 1.52 F1 / 8 3.84 ± 1.43 6.78 ± 1.84 * M2 / 4 3.95 ± 1.62 2.94 ± 1.26 * R4 / 4 4.44 ± 1.13 4.72 ± 1.57 * M1 / 4 4.01 ± 1.40 1.32 ± 1.15 * R3 / 4 4.37 ± 0.71 5.38 ± 1.83 * M1 / 8 3.87 ± 1.42 2.03 ± 1.75 * R2 / 4 4.13 ± 1.14 5.08 ± 1.63 *

*: Effective difference (P <0.05)

Length of impression body at margin New tray Old tray part Mean ± S.D. mean ± S.D. Sig. B3 / 4 4.64 ± 2.08 2.83 ± 2.26 * B2 / 4 4.74 ± 2.03 3.13 ± 2.06 * B1 / 4 4.63 ± 2.17 6.96 ± 2.58 * B1 / 8 4.55 ± 2.02 8.10 ± 2.59 * BAM 5.34 ± 1.84 8.89 ± 2.61 *

*: Effective difference (P <0.05)

The average length of each part showed that the newly developed tray showed the minimum value (2.83 mm) at the 1/8 margin (B1 / 8) and the maximum value (5.34 mm) at the foremost margin (BAM). The minimum value (2.83 mm) was shown in the margin (B3 / 4), and the maximum value (5.34 mm) was shown in the foremost margin (BAM). The mean of the thickness of each part is that the newly developed tray has the minimum value (3.57 mm) at the mid point (F2 / 4) of the 2/4 marginal part and the 2/4 alveolar definite part, and the 1/8 marginal part and the midpoint of the foremost margin (BA). The maximum value (4.55 ㎜) was shown at, and in the conventional tray, the minimum value (1.32 ㎜) at the 1/4 (M1 / 4) area on the midline and the maximum value at the midpoint (BA) of the 1/8 margin and the foremost margin (8.30 mm) is shown.

The distribution of length measurement and thickness measurement in all measured values is shown (FIGS. 17A to 17D). Looking at the distribution of the length measurements, in the conventional tray, the points having a value of 3-7 mm were 49% of the total, and the points having a value of 11 mm or more and 1 mm or less were 15.4% of the total. On the other hand, in the case of the newly developed tray, the points having a value of 3-7 mm were 63%, and the points having a value of 11 mm or more and 1 mm or less were 1.31%. The distribution of the thickness measurement is 58% of the points with 3-7 mm in the existing tray, 9.6% of the points with a value of 9 mm or more and less than 1 mm in the existing tray. The points having a value of 3-7 mm accounted for 82% of the total, and the points having a value of 9 mm or more or 1 mm or less accounted for 0.31% of the total.

Paired sample t-tests for marginal impression length and impression thickness in the new and existing trays showed significant differences between the two groups ( P <0.05). As a result of paired sample t-test for each length, significant differences were found in all 5 sites. Of these, 2 trays had shorter tray lengths and 3 trays had newer trays. As a result of paired sample t-test by thickness, the existing tray was smaller at 9 sites, the newly developed tray was smaller at 10 sites, and there was no significant difference in the remaining 6 sites. As a result, it was significant at 19 out of 25 sites. Difference was seen (FIGS. 18A and 18B).

The number of times of use of the trays in the two types of trays out of a total of 51 samples is shown (FIGS. 19A and 19B). Newly developed trays were 3 (45.10%), 2 (21.57%), 4 (15.69%), and 5 (9.80%) trays, while existing trays were 33 (33.33%) and 34 (31.37%). ), 35 (23.53%), 32 (11.76%), and tray 31 was never used.

<4-6-3> Fitness test in clinical

A total of 21 edentulous patients with total dentures in the maxilla were enrolled in the Department of Prosthodontics, Kyung Hee University. With the consent of the patients, trays of the appropriate size were also selected according to the criteria in Table 21 and impressions were taken with the newly developed trays using an irreversible aqueous colloidal impression material (Aroma Fine DF II, alginate, G-C Co., Japan). No stop point was used, and the tray was positioned relative to the anterior dentifrice by mixing the irreversible aqueous colloidal impression material according to the manufacturer's instructions. In this way, the measurement points were set in the same manner as when the fitness of the main model was examined, and the thickness of the impression body was measured with a periodontal probe and a ruler of 0.5 mm. In addition, the edge measurement point measured the distance between the tray edge and the impression edge, and additionally measured the distance between the pterygium and the tray edge on the impression body.

Impressions were collected and measured in the clinic using the newly developed tray, and the length of the impression margin was 4.69 ± 2.80 mm, and the thickness of the impression body was 4.59 ± 1.51 mm. The mean length of each segment had a minimum value (4.90 mm) at the 3/4 margin (B3 / 4) and a maximum value (6.60 mm) at the foremost margin (BAM) (FIG. 20A). The mean thickness of each site had a minimum value (4.03 mm) at the 1/8 margin (B1 / 8) and a maximum value (5.40 mm) at the incisor papillary IP (FIG. 20B). Looking at the distribution of the margin length measurement, in the conventional tray, the points having values of 3-7 mm were 49% of the total, and the points having values of 11 mm or more and 1 mm or less were 15.4% of the total. Looking at the distribution of the margin thickness, the points having a value of 3-7 mm accounted for 83% of the total, and the points having a value of more than 9 mm or less than 1 mm occupied 0.24% of the total.

The above results are summarized as follows.

1. As a result of visual observation and measurement, the newly developed tray has a higher anterior vertical height, a lower vertical posterior height than the conventional tray, and has a shorter front and rear length than the left and right width.

2. As a result of the goodness-of-fit test on the model, there was a significant difference in the overall impression thickness and marginal impression length between the newly developed tray and the conventional tray, and the variation of each part was small in the newly developed tray.

3. In clinical trials, the newly developed trays were tested for goodness of fit, and evenly distributed over all parts.

From the above results, the new developed tray showed more uniform thickness of the impression material than the conventional tray in the goodness-of-fit test using the existing model, and was closer to 4 mm, the thickness of the impression material originally set as the target. . In terms of the length of the impressions, the Schreinemakers trays increased from posterior to anterior, while the new trays were generally uniform. The Schreinemakers tray, which is one of the existing trays, exhibited a longer shape in front and rear than the left and right widths. In particular, when the size of the tray is small, there was no big difference, but as the size of the tray became larger, the left and right width diameters with respect to the front and rear length of the tray increased. This difference in fitness between the existing tray and the newly developed tray was also evident in the visual observation.

Example 5 Fabrication of Mandibular Edentulous Trays

<5-1> Schematic of Mandibular Alveolar Alveolar

First, the average line measurement item value of each group was changed to three-dimensional spatial coordinates. At this time, the coordinate of the foremost point of the position where the midline and the anterior buccal margin meets is (0,0,0) and the coordinates of the remaining points are obtained. The changed three-dimensional coordinates were input to the AutoCAD (R14) system on the 586 class personal computer to determine the positions of the points in the three-dimensional space (FIG. 21A). AutoCAD is a product of AUTODESK of USA and is the most widely used program among CAD programs in the world. It is used for 2D drawing and 3D object modeling, and the created drawing can be output as a drawing using Plotter. The input three-dimensional spatial coordinates were connected by a smooth curve (SPLINE) in consideration of the shape of the alveolar (FIG. 21B) to illustrate the shape of the alveolar (FIGS. 22A to 22C).

<5-2> Schematic drawing of the inner shape of the lower tray

Tray shaping was performed based on the schematized alveolar morphology. Space for impression material is needed between the ridge and the tray. The space provision amount for the irreversible water colloid impression material was set to 4 mm. To give a space at the alveolar site, first, a tangent line was drawn at the alveolar ridge to draw a perpendicular line to the tangent line, and the tray vertex was set at an offset point 4 mm away from the alveolar ridge coordinate (OFF-SET). In addition, in the narrowing side edge part, the space | interval of 4 mm was provided on the Z axis | shaft, and it determined by the tray marginal coordinate (FIGS. 23A-23C). The inner surface of the tray is illustrated by connecting three points of buccal, dental adjustment, and lingual to a smooth curve. When the tray is connected to the lingual margin, the typical `` S curve '' of the mandibular lateral side is reproduced by using the lingual marginal coordinate of the alveolar 4/4 as the inflection point when projecting on the horizontal plane. To the tray. The design for buccal platoons was omitted because the results of Korean statistics showed little. The following is a schematic view of the designed inner surface of the tray (FIGS. 24A-24C).

<5-3> Final Mandible Tray Modeling

For processing, we modeled the schematic tray data in AutoCAD. The program used was Cimatron 90 (V9.0, Israel), a CAD / CAM system, on a 686 Pentium computer. The Cimatron90 system is software for modeling drafting, solid, surface and finite elements in four modules. In the modeling work, the thickness of the tray was given for the strength of the tray, and the position and shape of the front and rear handles were determined. In the case of the rear grip, the height of the alveolus corresponding to the position of the first molar was determined to be the height of the posterior nodules corresponding to the height of the posterior alveolar. In the case of the front handle, it was located 20 mm above the anterior buccal margin (Fig. 25).

<5-4> lower jaw tray processing

After modeling was completed, the machine was machined using VM82 (Sakasaki, Japan), a CNC (Computer Nume-rical Control) Engraving & Milling System. The machine can be processed with a precision of 10 μm. When the modeled data is input to the controller [Fanuc 16MC], work is automatically performed on a work table according to three-dimensional numerical control. As a tray material, a solid shape can be maintained at a thickness of 2 mm, and an aluminum alloy that is harmless to a human body is used. After processing, the entire tray was uniformly drilled to maintain the impression material, and sharp portions including the marginal portions were polished. Next is the appearance of the completed Korean mandible preliminary tray (Fig. 26).

<5-5> Morphological Characteristics of Newly Developed Korean Mandible Tray

Compared with the existing Schreinemakers system, the newly developed Korean type tray reproduces the anatomical 'S curve' in the lingual margin (Fig. 27a), and in the buccal margin, it extends outward, in particular. It was confirmed in the posterior nodules buccal (Fig. 27b). In addition, the height of the rear handle was matched to the occlusal plane and the position was to be located rearward compared to the conventional tray to improve the clinical difficulty (Fig. 27c).

Example 6 Conventional Tray Selection and Model Production

<6-1> conventional lower jawless tray

The edentulous tray used in the comparison was selected from Schreinemakers com-plete denture tray (Clan Dental Products, Netherlands) (FIG. 28). The ready-made trays are divided into 6 sets by size for the impression of mandibular gingival impression. By selecting the tray, you can select the trays similar to this value by measuring the inner width of both posterior nodules.

<6-2> Tray Model Production

A model of each tray was produced for comparison with the newly developed tray (FIG. 29) and the existing tray. First, the inner surface of the tray and the marginal part were softened and pressed by 2 mm of sheet wax to give a uniform space. Care was taken not to thin certain areas during welding. Then, the tray model was produced using the type 3 hard gypsum.

Example 7 Length-Width Item Model Comparison with Conventional Trays

<7-1> Statistical processing and analysis

The paired sample t-test (P <0.05) was performed to verify the difference between the conventional tray and the newly developed tray, and data was inputted into the SPSS 8.0 statistics program for Windows to analyze the distribution of impression materials.

<7-2> three-dimensional measurement

First fix the tray model to the control panel of the 3D instrument and place it in the proper position on the instrument reference plate. Using the reference plane plate, the T-shaped plate is placed on the posterior part of both posterior nodules and the posterior nodules are located at the same distance on both sides. The midline was determined by the forward midline through a window in the center of the T-plate. Three-dimensional measurements were performed based on this location. We divided the frontal and posterior nodules into four quarters and measured the width of the buccal side and the total length before and after.

<7-3> Comparison of line measurement items

<7-3-1> Comparison of Buccal Width Items

When comparing the buccal width items of the conventional tray and the newly developed tray with the Korean model statistics, there was a difference between the two tray groups (Table 24, Table 25 and Table 26).

Buccal marginal width of left and right Korean alveolar alveoli (Buc.) group 1/4 Buc. 2/4 Buc. 3/4 Buc. 4/4 Buc. One 36.61 49.67 63.36 65.69 2 38.71 53.52 63.86 68.57 3 43.18 58.55 69.87 70.37 4 42.74 59.28 70.40 71.04 5 43.53 61.30 73.36 73.75 6 47.07 66.63 79.02 77.69

Average (mm)

Buccal margin width (Buc.) Between left and right of new tray size 1/4 Buc. 2/4 Buc. 3/4 Buc. 4/4 Buc. One 37.42 48.25 64.03 65.76 2 39.24 54.32 65.21 66.66 3 44.53 59.12 70.31 68.72 4 45.47 60.02 71.32 70.25 5 45.53 62.30 74.05 73.55 6 48.23 67.20 78.04 77.26

Average (mm)

Buccal margin width (Buc.) size 1/4 Buc. 2/4 Buc. 3/4 Buc. 4/4 Buc. One 39.78 53.18 57.70 57.06 2 43.92 55.77 60.58 58.92 3 45.67 60.35 65.86 64.12 4 47.83 62.19 67.13 65.27 5 48.24 62.76 69.47 66.78 6 49.28 64.67 72.06 71.58

Average (mm)

It can be seen that it is difficult to select a tray coinciding with the Korean unchallenged buccal width because the inconsistency between the six buccal width items of the conventional tray and the Korean model statistics is significant (FIGS. 30A to 30F). However, the buccal width of the newly developed tray generally coincided with the buccal width of Koreans (FIGS. 31A to 31F).

<7-3-2> Comparison of lingual width items

When comparing lingual width items, both existing and newly developed trays were generally consistent with Korean model statistics (Tables 27, 28 and 29).

The width of the lingual margin of the left and right of Korean teeth group 2/4 Lin. 3/4 Lin. 4/4 Lin. One 22.33 30.06 35.02 2 19.89 31.24 36.17 3 23.24 32.99 39.77 4 24.75 34.93 41.35 5 25.64 36.18 43.37 6 31.23 42.33 49.29

Average (mm)

Lingual margin width (Lin.) size 2/4 Lin. 3/4 Lin. 4/4 Lin. One 18.44 30.44 34.78 2 20.23 32.41 36.53 3 24.01 34.02 40.42 4 25.43 35.54 42.21 5 26.32 37.00 44.64 6 32.04 42.20 50.32

Average (mm)

Lingual margin width (Lin.) size 2/4 Lin. 3/4 Lin. 4/4 Lin. One 22.12 30.10 35.18 2 23.55 31.29 37.55 3 24.69 33.71 40.08 4 27.75 36.94 44.51 5 28.06 38.13 46.03 6 29.99 40.07 48.91

Average (mm)

<7-3-3> Comparison between Maximum Width and Total Length Before and After

When comparing the maximum width and total length before and after the conventional tray and the newly developed tray (Table 30), the newly developed tray showed the larger value in the existing tray in terms of the width (FIGS. 32A and 32B).

Measurement of front and rear arch length and maximum arch width (W) Korean soldier statistics New tray measurement Previous tray measurement group W L L / W size W L L / W size W L L / W One 65.69 44.21 0.67 One 65.76 44.90 0.68 One 58.01 45.38 0.78 2 68.57 48.01 0.70 2 66.66 48.54 0.72 2 60.98 48.71 0.80 3 70.37 50.51 0.72 3 68.72 49.07 0.71 3 65.91 49.29 0.75 4 71.04 50.53 0.71 4 70.25 50.77 0.72 4 66.82 51.93 0.78 5 73.75 50.83 0.69 5 73.55 51.93 0.71 5 67.69 53.67 0.79 6 77.69 51.88 0.67 6 77.26 52.00 0.67 6 72.23 54.43 0.75

Average (mm) W: width between the left and right 4/4 adjustment

L: Total length before and after

L / W: ratio between length and width

Therefore, the newly developed tray showed a small value in the length-to-width ratio, which was in general agreement with the Korean model statistics (FIG. 33).

Example 8 Compliance Check of Newly Developing Tray

<8-1> Model Inspection

The suitability of the trays, which were sampled from 64 Korean mandibular subtypes used in the statistical survey, was examined by measuring the thickness of the impression material. Model tests were carried out in the following sequence.

First, in the statistical survey, the location of 39 measurement points on the model used for measurement was popular as a copying pencil (JOLLY Austria).

Second, a stop point was given with a resin block of 4 mm thickness on three parts of each tray (front 1 and rear 2) of each tray for standardization during pulling.

Third, the irreversible water colloid impression material (Aroma Fine DF II, Alginate, GC Co., Japan) was mixed according to the coma ratio of the manufacturer to raise the model. At this time, the front stop point was placed in the anterior gingiva and the tray was pressed until the stop point or tray margin of the three parts contacted the model.

Fourth, after the impression material hardening, the tray was removed from the model to remove the excessive impression material, and then the impression material thickness at 39 measurement points popular on the inner surface of the impression material was measured. In measuring thickness, a periodontal probe was used and a stopper was mounted to contact the lifting surface in the vertical direction. In the measurement of the marginal area, the impression material was cut to the margin to measure the distance from the tray margin. The interval at the time of thickness measurement was 0.5 mm.

Fifth, the above process was carried out using the existing Schreine-makers system and the newly developed Korean tray, respectively, to test the model suitability between the two trays.

<8-1-1> Comparison of Impression Body Thickness by Measuring Area in Model Inspection

A total of 64 Korean edentulous models were drawn up, and the impression thicknesses at 39 sites were measured and compared (Table 31).

Comparison of average impression thickness between old tray and new tray Old tray New tray Old tray New tray Old tray New tray area Mean ± S.D. Mean ± S.D. Paired sample t-test area Mean ± S.D. Mean ± S.D. Paired sample t-test area Mean ± S.D. Mean ± S.D. Paired sample t-test One 4.86 ± 2.24 3.82 ± 1.73 * 14 2.84 ± 1.54 5.13 ± 1.93 * 27 6.64 ± 2.53 4.54 ± 1.95 * 2 4.50 ± 1.44 4.18 ± 0.98 15 3.44 ± 1.77 4.47 ± 2.10 * 28 3.79 ± 1.93 4.31 ± 1.31 * 3 3.41 ± 1.86 4.49 ± 1.40 * 16 6.92 ± 2.80 4.83 ± 1.87 * 29 5.47 ± 2.50 5.02 ± 2.41 * 4 4.45 ± 2.50 4.16 ± 1.77 * 17 4.23 ± 2.19 4.58 ± 1.70 30 5.56 ± 2.42 5.30 ± 2.00 5 3.91 ± 2.54 4.03 ± 1.68 18 4.07 ± 2.11 4.24 ± 1.79 31 3.83 ± 1.80 4.08 ± 1.38 6 4.83 ± 2.00 4.52 ± 1.55 19 7.41 ± 2.62 4.93 ± 2.45 * 32 6.68 ± 2.91 5.02 ± 2.05 * 7 5.85 ± 1.93 4.19 ± 1.67 * 20 4.02 ± 1.73 4.15 ± 1.63 33 5.10 ± 2.52 4.60 ± 2.34 8 5.47 ± 2.16 3.86 ± 1.76 * 21 4.44 ± 1.88 4.97 ± 1.96 * 34 4.65 ± 2.58 4.16 ± 2.26 9 4.35 ± 2.28 4.21 ± 1.61 22 4.36 ± 1.67 5.31 ± 1.74 * 35 5.48 ± 2.58 4.81 ± 1.86 * 10 3.87 ± 1.78 4.63 ± 1.65 * 23 4.18 ± 1.95 4.22 ± 1.79 36 6.12 ± 2.52 5.16 ± 2.15 * 11 6.61 ± 2.33 5.04 ± 1.73 * 24 7.91 ± 3.09 4.76 ± 2.31 * 37 4.50 ± 2.63 4.81 ± 2.35 12 2.90 ± 1.79 4.22 ± 2.04 * 25 4.62 ± 2.35 4.49 ± 1.96 38 4.85 ± 2.39 4.61 ± 2.06 13 2.88 ± 1.75 4.98 ± 1.83 * 26 4.45 ± 1.84 3.81 ± 2.02 * 39 4.80 ± 2.61 4.71 ± 2.02

Average (mm)

*: Effective difference (P <0.05)

Conventional trays showed a difference in impression thickness for each part, but newly developed trays showed a uniform value overall (FIG. 34). Given that the ideal irreversible aqueous colloid thickness is 4 to 6 mm, the new tray has 3 out of 39 areas compared to 16 out of 39 areas (41%). Only (8%) were off (FIG. 35). In addition, as a result of performing a paired sample t-test to test the difference between the two trays, 23 of 39 sites showed significance (P <0.05).

<8-1-2> Comparison of Overall Impression Thickness Distribution in Model Inspection

Looking at the thickness of the impression material of all 39 sites, the average value of the conventional trays were irregular, the deviation of the average value was large, but the newly developed trays showed a uniform average value and a small deviation (Fig. 36). As a result of looking at the 39 sites left and right average, the same value as shown above (Fig. 37).

<8-2> Clinical examination

First of all, 25 patients with mandibular edentulous patients who recently visited the Department of Prosthodontics, K University Dental Hospital were selected. Caliper was used to measure the distance between the left and right posterior nodules. An irreversible water colloid impression material (Aroma Fine DF II, Alginate, GC Co., Japan) was mixed and mixed according to the coma ratio of the manufacturer. After positioning based on the anterior pretreatment at the time of pulling, the patient was instructed to raise the tongue and contact the upper lip and press the rear handle of the tray with both indexes. After fixation of the tray, muscle formation of the left and right buccal margins and the lower lip was performed. The marginal areas were marked, and the impression material thicknesses of the buccal margin 9, lingual margin 9, dentition 11 and total 29 were measured at intervals of 0.5 mm using the periodontal probe. At the time of measurement, marginal part was taken in consideration of length of impression material and alveolar part in consideration of thickness of impression material.

<8-2-1> Total Impression Thickness Distribution of Clinical Examination

As a result of measuring the impression thickness of 29 sites in a total of 25 patients, the average distribution was 4.20 (mm) and standard deviation 1.50 (mm) (Fig. 38). 53% in the 4-6 mm range, the ideal impression thickness, and 82% in the 3-7 mm clinically acceptable range, indicating clinical fit.

<8-2-2> Impression Thickness of 29 Sites in Clinical Examination

The mean values of impression thickness for 29 sites in 25 patients are as follows (Table 32).

Average value of impression body thickness Buccal area Mean ± S.D. Lingual area Mean ± S.D. Adjusting Area Mean ± S.D. Buc. (Middle) 4.10 ± 1.01 Lin. (Middle) 3.76 ± 1.42 Crest (middle) 3.82 ± 1.76 Buc.-1 (Rt.) 4.30 ± 1.11 Lin.-1 (Rt.) 4.18 ± 1.23 Crest-1 (Rt.) 4.40 ± 1.02 Buc.-2 (Rt.) 3.90 ± 0.96 Lin.-2 (Rt.) 4.10 ± 1.19 Crest-2 (Rt.) 4.40 ± 1.84 Buc.-3 (Rt.) 3.70 ± 1.30 Lin.-3 (Rt.) 4.50 ± 1.70 Crest-3 (Rt.) 4.50 ± 1.77 Buc.-4 (Rt.) 4.18 ± 1.75 Lin.-4 (Rt.) 3.88 ± 1.12 Crest-4 (Rt.) 4.50 ± 1.46 Buc.-1 (Lt.) 4.54 ± 1.16 Lin.-1 (Lt.) 4.20 ± 1.26 Crest-5 (Rt.) 4.00 ± 1.81 Buc.-2 (Lt.) 4.22 ± 1.22 Lin.-2 (Lt.) 4.12 ± 1.47 Crest-1 (Lt.) 4.04 ± 1.55 Buc.-3 (Lt.) 4.18 ± 1.14 Lin.-3 (Lt.) 4.38 ± 1.56 Crest-2 (Lt.) 4.50 ± 1.71 Buc.-4 (Lt.) 4.18 ± 1.76 Lin.-4 (Lt.) 3.64 ± 1.64 Crest-3 (Lt.) 4.18 ± 1.90 Crest-4 (Lt.) 3.96 ± 1.66 Crest-5 (Lt.) 4.92 ± 1.32

Average (mm)

Looking at this diagrammatically, it can be seen that the overall uniformity and the deviation are small when the new tray is raised (FIG. 39A). In addition, the 29 parts are divided into buccal margins (FIG. 39b), lingual margins (FIG. 39c), and tooth adjusters (FIG. 39d). Relatively uniform values are shown. The marginal part of the buccal side is a key part of the impression, and it can be seen that the newly developed tray is also clinically suitable.

The results obtained in the above examples are summarized as follows.

1. The conventional commercially available mandibular ready-made trays have narrower buccal width and excessive length before and after compared with Korean modelless teeth. This suggests that ready-made trays by Western standards are not suitable for Koreans in shape and size.

2. Based on the statistics of Korean mandibular archery model, a new Korean mandibular jaw tray was produced and compared with the conventional tray, which showed more similarity to Korean model statistics in line measurement value and length-to-width ratio.

3. When comparing the thickness of the impression body when the impression of the impression between the existing tray and the newly manufactured tray is compared, the existing tray at each measurement site is irregular and the deviation is large, whereas the newly manufactured tray is uniform and small in all measurement areas. appear.

4. When comparing the impression thickness distributions of 39 parts in the conformity test on the model, only 3 parts (8%) were found in the newly manufactured trays, considering that the ideal irreversible water colloid impression material thickness was 4-6 mm. Compared to being out of category, 16 trays (41%) were out of this category.

5. As a result of performing Pair Sample t-test to examine the difference between the existing tray and the newly developed tray, there were significant differences in 23 out of 39 areas (P <0.05). Compared to the tray, there was a difference in size and shape.

6. As a result of measuring the thickness of the impressions of 29 sites in actual clinical application, the overall average was 4.20 ± 1.50 (㎜), and 22 sites (75%) belonged to the ideal 4 ~ 6 ㎜ range and were clinically suitable. Showed.

In the above results, the newly developed mandibular gingival tray newly produced in the present invention was more suitable for the shape and size of Korean mandibular archery than the conventional ready-made tray.

As described above, the newly developed tray of the present invention has a uniform thickness of the impression body for each part compared with the existing tray, which means that it is suitable for the Korean dentifrice alveolar. In addition, when the thickness of the ideal irreversible aqueous colloidal impression material is 4 to 6 mm, when the 39 trays are measured, the newly developed trays are out of this category, whereas the conventional trays are out of 16 areas. Seemed. The paired sample t-test was performed to verify the difference between the newly developed tray and the existing tray. As a result, 23 out of 39 sites showed significant differences (P <0.05), indicating that there was a difference between the two groups.

To examine the actual clinical suitability, 25 mandibular edentulous patients were examined. In the measurement of impression thickness, the buccal margin is determined more importantly than the alveolar site. Confirmed that the tray is suitable for the arch.

As described above, the upper and lower jaw gingival impression acquisition tray of the present invention has a uniform thickness of the impression body compared to the existing trays suitable for Korean gingival alveolar can be usefully used in the treatment of Korean gingival arch.

Claims (14)

Vertical height (mm) at the front part of the first tray, vertical height (mm) at the rear part, horizontal width diameter (mm) at the B3 / 4 area and sagittal length (mm) at the center line (hereinafter in the same order) respectively 13.0 -14.0, 12.5-13.5, 60-65 and 49-53, second tray 13.0-14.0, 13.0-14.0, 62-68 and 50-55, third tray 13.5-14.5, 13.5-14.5, 65-75 And 51-56, the fourth tray is 14.0-15.0, 14.0-15.0, 68-78 and 51-58, and the fifth tray is in a tray crowd of 14.0-15.0, 14.0-15.0, 73-83 and 54-62. Tray for maxillary edentulous impression selected. The width (mm) of the archery at the B 3/4 portion of the first tray and the width (mm) of the inner surface of the tray at the B 3/4 portion (hereinafter in the same order) are each 57 or less. And 57-61, the second tray is 57-61 and 61-64, the third tray is 61-65 and 64-68, the fourth tray is 65-69 and 68-72, and the fifth tray is 69-73 and Tray for maxillary edentulous impressions selected from a crowd of 72-76 trays. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the vertical height (mm) at the front part of the first tray, the vertical height (mm) at the rear part, the horizontal width diameter (mm) at the B3 / 4 area, the sagittal length (mm) at the centerline and the width / length The ratios (hereinafter in the same order) are 13.5, 13, 62, 51 and 1.22, the second tray is 13.5, 13.5, 65.5, 52 and 1.26, the third tray is 14, 14, 70, 53.5 and 1.31, the fourth A tray for maxillary dentifrice impressions selected from a tray crowd consisting of 14.5, 14.5, 73.5, 54.5 and 1.35, and the fifth tray consisting of 14.5, 14.5, 78, 58 and 1.35. 4. The width of the archery (mm) in the B 3/4 portion of the first tray and the width (mm) of the inner surface of the tray in the B 3/4 portion (hereinafter in the same order) are each 57 or less. And maxillary selected from a crowd of trays consisting of 58.18, 57-61 and 62.65 for the second tray, 61-65 and 67.30 for the third tray, 65-69 and 69.85 for the fourth tray, and 69-73 and 74.32 for the fifth tray. Echigo impression tray. The first tray's 1/4 buccal width (mm), 2/4 buccal width (mm), 3/4 buccal width (mm) and 4/4 buccal width (mm) (hereinafter in the same order) are each 38, 45-51, 63.5-64.5 and 65-66, the second tray is 38-42, 51-57, 64.5-68 and 64.5-67.5, the third tray is 42-45, 57-59.5, 68-71 and 67.5-69.5, the fourth tray is 45-45.5, 59.5-61, 71-72.5 and 69.5-71.5, the fifth tray is 45.5-47, 61-64, 72.5-76 and 71.5-75, and the sixth tray is 47 Consisting of -49.5, 64-70, 76-80 and 75-79, 2/4 lingual width (mm), 3/4 lingual width (mm) and 4/4 lingual width (mm) of the first tray , Same order) 17-19, 29-31.5 and 33-35.5, second tray 19-22, 31.5-33 and 35.5-38.5, third tray 22-25, 33-34.5 and 38.5-41 The fourth tray is 25-26, 34.5-36 and 41-43, the fifth tray is 26-29, 36-39 and 43-46, and the sixth tray is 29-35, 39-44 and 46-54. Mandible Chic Impression selected from a crowded tray Deukyong tray. 6. The method of claim 5, wherein the width (mm) and total fore and aft length (mm) (hereinafter in the same order) between the right and left 4/4 adjustments of the first tray are 65-66 and 42-46, and the second tray is 66 -68 and 46-49, the third tray is 68-69.5 and 49-49.5, the fourth tray is 69.5-72 and 49.5-51, the fifth tray is 72-75 and 51-52, and the sixth tray is 75- Tray for mandibular impression impressions selected from a crowd of trays of 79 and 52-53. The method according to claim 5, wherein the 1/4 buccal width (mm), 2/4 buccal width (mm), 3/4 buccal width (mm) and 4/4 buccal width (mm) of the first tray (hereinafter, the same order) 37.42, 48.25, 64.03 and 65.76, the second tray 39.24, 54.32, 65.21 and 66.66, the third tray 44.53, 59.12, 70.31 and 68.72, the fourth tray 45.47, 60.02, 71.32 and 70.25, the fifth The trays consist of 45.53, 62.30, 74.05 and 73.55, and the sixth tray consists of 48.23, 67.20, 78.04 and 77.26, with 2/4 lingual width (mm), 3/4 lingual width (mm) and 4 / of the first tray. 4 lingual widths (in the same order below) are 18.44, 30.44 and 34.78, 20.23, 32.41 and 36.53 for the second tray, 24.01, 34.02 and 40.42 for the third tray and 25.43, 35.54 and 42.21 for the fourth tray A tray for mandibular gingival impressions, wherein the fifth tray is 26.32, 37 and 44.64, and the sixth is 32.04, 42.20 and 50.32. 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the width (mm), the total longitudinal length (mm), and the ratio between length and width (hereinafter in the same order) between the left and right 4/4 adjustments of the first tray are 65.76, 44.90 and 0.68, 66.66, 48.54 and 0.72 for the third tray, 68.72, 49.07 and 0.71 for the third tray, 70.25, 50.77 and 0.72 for the fourth tray, 73.55, 51.93 and 0.71 for the fifth tray, and 77.26, 52.00 and 0.67 for the sixth tray. A tray for mandible impressions from the crowd. Iii) replicating the edentulous main model from the subject; Ii) setting 20 to 50 reference points in the main model and measuring them in three dimensions; Iii) classifying the size of the alveolar arch based on the three-dimensional measurement; Iii) converting the size of the classified alveolar arch into three-dimensional spatial coordinates to create a shape of the alveolar as a schematic tray; And Iii) modeling and processing the schematic tray, the method of manufacturing the tray for gingivious impression taking according to claim 1 or 2. 10. The method according to claim 9, wherein the reference point of step ii) is 39. 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the three-dimensional measurement of the step ii) is made by line measurement. 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the line measurement is " width between 4/4 left and right tooth adjustments ". 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the drawing tray of step iii) draws the inner surface of the tray with an "S curve" connecting three points of buccal, dentition and lingual in a smooth curve. How to make. Multiple trays according to the size of the teeth A divider for measuring the width between the left and right alveolar vestibules in the alveolar nodules in the case of the maxilla of the subject, and the width between the left and right alveolar vestibules in the anterior region of the posterior nodules in the case of the mandible; A reference table for detecting the intrinsic colors corresponding to each other by contacting the measured and extended length dividers without reversing the original shape; Iii) a tray sorting step of classifying a plurality of maxillary and mandibular trays according to the dental size of the examinee; Ii) assigning an intrinsic color to a pair of upper and lower jaw trays that are classified in the same manner and assigning a different intrinsic color to each pair of upper and lower jaw trays classified differently; A divider measuring step of measuring width between left and right alveolar ridges of the alveolar nodules in the case of the maxilla, and measuring width of left and right alveolar vices in the anterior segment of the posterior nodules using the divider; Iii) a color detection step of detecting a corresponding eigencolor by measuring the reference table to be described later while leaving the measured divider intact; And Iii) a tray selection step of selecting a tray pair corresponding to the intrinsic color of the reference table.

Images