http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Atmospheric Combustion Chemical Vapor Deposition for High Functional Application
Dongyoeul Lee,YoungJin Kwak,KyungHoon Nam,Younghwa Jung,Woosung Jung,Munjong Eom,Seokjun Hong,Taeyeob Kim,Changsik Ha 한국표면공학회 2010 한국표면공학회 학술발표회 초록집 Vol.2010 No.11
Different from conventional PVD and CVD process, Combustion Chemical Vapor Deposition (CCVD) is environmental friendly vapor deposition process based on atmospheric pressure with thermal energy from combustion. CCVD equipment is consisted of reservoir of hydrocarbon fuel and precursor, gas mixing burner, sample carrier and control system. The combustion energy from gas mixture of hydrocarbon, propane and precursor, HMDSO(Hexamethyldisiloxane) saturated air generates chemical reaction of pyrolysis and oxidation of precursor to form silicon oxide layer on the steel substrate. Because of hydroxide in dense silicon oxide layer, even though its thickness is just scores of nanometers, CCVD treated steel surface shows greatly improved wetting ability, adhesion with organic resin and coating. When the organic resin coating containing polar functional group, for example, carbonyl, acetate and hydroxyl functional group applied on CCVD treated steel surface, covalent chemical bond seems to be generated between hydroxide of CCVD layer and functional group of organic resin and adhesion between organic resin layer and substrate and corrosion resistance of substrate is highly promoted. Ultra thin silicon oxide layer of CCVD is analyzed its structure by atomic force microscopy(AFM), optical 3D profiler and ellipsometer.
Ko Min Jung,Park Dong A,Kim Sung Hyun,Ko Eun Sook,Shin Kyung Hwan,Lim Woosung,Kwak Beom Seok,Chang Jung Min 대한영상의학회 2021 Korean Journal of Radiology Vol.22 No.8
Objective: To compare the accuracy for detecting breast cancer in the diagnostic setting between the use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), defined as DBT alone or combined DBT and digital mammography (DM), and the use of DM alone through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library and five Korean local databases were searched for articles published until March 25, 2020. We selected studies that reported diagnostic accuracy in women who were recalled after screening or symptomatic. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. A bivariate random effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity. We compared the diagnostic accuracy between DBT and DM alone using meta-regression and subgroup analyses by modality of intervention, country, existence of calcifications, breast density, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category threshold, study design, protocol for participant sampling, sample size, reason for diagnostic examination, and number of readers who interpreted the studies. Results: Twenty studies (n = 44513) that compared DBT and DM alone were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86–0.93) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.84–0.94), respectively, for DBT, which were higher than 0.76 (95% CI 0.68–0.83) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73–0.89), respectively, for DM alone (p < 0.001). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.97) for DBT and 0.86 (95% CI 0.82–0.88) for DM alone. The higher sensitivity and specificity of DBT than DM alone were consistently noted in most subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Conclusion: Use of DBT was more accurate than DM alone for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Women with clinical symptoms or abnormal screening findings could be more effectively evaluated for breast cancer using DBT, which has a superior diagnostic performance compared to DM alone.