切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版) ›› 2026, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (05) : 404 -409. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1366.2026.05.007

论著

根尖周炎根管治疗疗效列线图预测模型的构建及效能验证
蔡洁琛†(), 余晓宁, 谢健琦   
  1. 惠州市第一人民医院口腔科,惠州 516001
  • 收稿日期:2026-01-06 出版日期:2026-10-01
  • 通信作者: 蔡洁琛

Construction and validation of a nomogram prediction model for the efficacy of root canal treatment in apical periodontitis

Jiechen Cai†(), Xiaoning Yu, Jianqi Xie   

  1. Department of Stomatology, Huizhou First People's Hospital, Huizhou 516001, China
  • Received:2026-01-06 Published:2026-10-01
  • Corresponding author: Jiechen Cai
  • Supported by:
    Science and Technology Planning Project of Huizhou(2024CZ010025)
引用本文:

蔡洁琛, 余晓宁, 谢健琦. 根尖周炎根管治疗疗效列线图预测模型的构建及效能验证[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(05): 404-409.

Jiechen Cai, Xiaoning Yu, Jianqi Xie. Construction and validation of a nomogram prediction model for the efficacy of root canal treatment in apical periodontitis[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Stomatological Research(Electronic Edition), 2026, 20(05): 404-409.

目的

探讨影响根尖周炎根管治疗失败的相关因素,依据影响因素研究根尖周炎根管治疗疗效列线图预测模型的构建及其效能验证。

方法

前瞻性选取惠州市第一人民医院2024年4月至2025年6月收治150例根尖周炎患者为研究对象,患者均行根管治疗,术后随访6个月,按照根管治疗疗效标准分为治疗失败组和治疗成功组,收集患者临床资料,采用Logistic回归分析影响根尖周炎根管治疗失败的因素,构建预测根尖周炎根管治疗失败的列线图模型,并对该风险预测模型进行效能验证。

结果

随访结果显示,150例根尖周炎患者中35例(23.33%)治疗失败、115例(76.67%)治疗成功。Logistic回归分析结果显示,牙位(后牙)、根管治疗次数(≥2次)、冠封闭效果(有冠渗漏)、根管充填长度(欠填/超填)和器械折断(有)是根尖周炎根管治疗失败的独立危险因素,OR分别为2.002、2.079、2.255、2.063和1.950,95% CI分别为1.080 ~ 3.711、1.159 ~ 3.729、1.111 ~ 4.575、1.076 ~ 3.954和1.113 ~ 3.416,P值分别为0.028、0.014、0.025、0.030和0.020。根据上述5项危险因素构建列线图预测模型ROC曲线下面积为0.836(95% CI:0.781 ~ 0.892),具有较好区分度,且校准曲线斜率接近1,Hosmer-Lemeshow检验显示模型拟合度较好(χ2 = 7.568,P = 0.268)。

结论

牙位、根管治疗次数、冠封闭效果、根管充填长度和器械折断是影响根尖周炎根管治疗的危险因素,据此构建的列线图模型具有较好的准确率和临床应用价值,可为临床根尖周炎治疗提供参考。

Objective

To explore the factors influencing the failure of root canal treatment in apical periodontitis, and to construct and validate a nomogram prediction model for the efficacy of root canal treatment in apical periodontitis based on these factors.

Methods

A prospective study was conducted involving 150 patients with apical periodontitis treated at Huizhou First People's Hospital from April 2024 to June 2025. All patients underwent root canal treatment and were followed up for 6 months. They were divided into the treatment failure group and the treatment success group according to the efficacy criteria of root canal treatment. Clinical data of the patients were collected. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the factors influencing the failure of root canal treatment in apical periodontitis. A nomogram prediction model for the failure of root canal treatment in apical periodontitis was constructed, and the performance of this risk prediction model was validated.

Results

The follow-up results showed that among the 150 patients with apical periodontitis, 35 (23.33%) had treatment failure and 115 (76.67%) had treatment success. Logistic regression analysis revealed that tooth position (posterior teeth), the number of root canal treatments (≥2 times), crown sealing effect (crown leakage), root canal filling length (underfilling/overfilling), and instrument fracture (present) were independent risk factors for the failure of root canal treatment in apical periodontitis, with odds ratios (ORs) of 2.002, 2.079, 2.255, 2.063, and 1.950, respectively. The corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 1.080-3.711, 1.159-3.729, 1.111-4.575, 1.076-3.954, and 1.113-3.416, with P-values of 0.028, 0.014, 0.025, 0.030, and 0.020, respectively. The nomogram model developed using these five risk factors demonstrated an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.836 (95% CI: 0.781-0.892), indicating good discrimination. The slope of the calibration curve was close to 1, and the Hosmer and Lemeshow test showed that the model had good fit (χ2 = 7.568, P = 0.268) .

Conclusions

Tooth position, the number of root canal treatments, crown sealing effect, root canal filling length, and instrument fracture are risk factors affecting root canal treatment in apical periodontitis. The nomogram model constructed based on these factors has good accuracy and clinical application value, and may serve as a reference for clinical treatment of apical periodontitis.

表1 150例根尖周炎患者根管治疗效果单因素分析[例(%)]
因素 治疗失败(n=35) 治疗成功(n=115) χ2值 P值
年龄(岁)     1.114 0.291
20 ~ 35 15(42.86) 61(53.04)    
36 ~ 50 20(57.14) 54(46.96)    
性别     0.034 0.853
男 21(60.00) 71(61.74)    
女 14(40.00) 44(38.26)    
病程(月)     0.482 0.487
<3 16(45.71) 45(39.13)    
3 ~ 6 19(54.29) 70(60.87)    
牙位     39.865 0.000
前牙 13(37.14) 102(88.70)    
后牙 22(62.86) 13(11.30)    
无菌操作不当情况     17.904 0.000
有 25(71.43) 36(31.30)    
无 10(28.57) 79(68.70)    
根管治疗次数     11.358 0.001
<2次 23(65.71) 103(89.57)    
≥2次 12(34.29) 12(10.43)    
髓腔预备不当情况     0.113 0.737
有 20(57.14) 62(53.91)    
无 15(42.86) 53(46.09)    
根管预备不当情况     32.437 0.000
有 21(60.00) 15(13.04)    
无 14(40.00) 100(86.96)    
根管弯曲度     36.570 0.000
≤5° 10(28.57) 83(72.17)    
>5°≤20° 7(20.00) 23(20.00)    
>20° 18(51.43) 9(7.83)    
根管充填方法     0.002 0.969
AH-plus糊剂热牙胶垂直加压充填 19(54.29) 62(53.91)    
AH-plus糊剂冷牙胶侧向加压充填 16(45.71) 53(46.09)    
根管充填长度     6.167 0.013
恰填 5(14.29) 42(36.52)    
欠填/超填 30(85.71) 73(63.48)    
根管充填密度     0.984 0.321
致密 21(60.00) 58(50.43)    
欠致密 14(40.00) 57(49.57)    
冠封闭效果     15.442 0.000
有冠渗漏 26(74.29) 42(36.52)    
无冠渗漏 9(25.71) 73(63.48)    
器械折断     15.715 0.000
有 28(80.00) 48(41.74)    
无 7(20.00) 67(58.26)    
表2 根尖周炎患者根管治疗效果的多元Logistic回归分析变量赋值
表3 根尖周炎根管治疗效果多因素分析结果
图1 根尖周炎根管治疗效果多因素分析的列线图模型
图2 根尖周炎根管治疗效果多因素分析的列线图预测模型ROC曲线
图3 根尖周炎根管治疗效果多因素分析的列线图预测模型校准曲线
图4 根尖周炎根管治疗效果多因素分析的列线图预测模型决策曲线
[1]
Tibúrcio-Machado C S,Michelon C,Zanatta F B,et al. The global prevalence of apical periodontitis:A systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Int Endod J,2021,54(5):712-735. DOI:10.1111/iej.13467.
[2]
Cope A L,Francis N,Wood F,et al. Systemic antibiotics for symptomatic apical periodontitis and acute apical abscess in adults[J]. Cochrane database Syst Rev,2024,5(5):CD010136. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD010136.pub4.
[3]
Burns L E,Kim J,Wu Y,et al. Outcomes of primary root canal therapy:An updated systematic review of longitudinal clinical studies published between 2003 and 2020[J]. Int Endod J,2022,55(7):714-731. DOI:10.1111/iej.13736.
[4]
王少华,熊战胜,樊丽娟,等.慢性根尖周炎影响因素及其根管内病原菌定植情况[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2023,33(21):3279-3283. DOI:10.11816/cn.ni.2023-230433.
[5]
Govindaraju L,Jeevanandan G,Vishwanathaiah S,et al. Clinical and radiographic success rate of the root canal filling materials used in primary teeth:A systematic review[J]. Dent Med Probl,2024,61(3):447-455. DOI:10.17219/dmp/152235.
[6]
周学东.牙体牙髓学[M]. 5版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2020:178-186.
[7]
郭晶晶,汤屹群,何宏,等. 3种根管充填方法在慢性根尖周炎根管治疗中的短期疗效观察[J].上海口腔医学,2022,31(5):544-549. DOI:10.19439/j.sjos.2022.05.018.
[8]
中华口腔医学会牙体牙髓病学专业委员会.显微根管治疗技术指南[J].中华口腔医学杂志,2016,51(8):465-467. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2016.08.005.
[9]
Schneider S W. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol,1971,32(2):271-275. DOI:10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1.
[10]
Ouarti I E,Chala S,Sakout M,et al. Prevalence and risk factors of Apical periodontitis in endodontically treated teeth:Cross-sectional study in an Adult Moroccan subpopulation[J]. BMC Oral Health,2021,21(1):124-134. DOI:10.1186/s12903-021-01491-6.
[11]
Wen Y H,Lin Y X,Zhou L,et al. The immune landscape in apical periodontitis:From mechanism to therapy[J]. Int Endod J,2024,57(11):1526-1545. DOI:10.1111/iej.14125.
[12]
缪惠灵,陆小丽,马遥,等.慢性根尖周炎患者行根管治疗预后影响因素分析及列线图预测模型构建[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2024,40(7):407-411. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-1634.2024.07.006.
[13]
姜雨然,朱琳虹,张敬.根管治疗后疾病的临床研究[J].实用口腔医学杂志,2020,36(2):373-377. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1001-3733.2020.02.054.
[14]
Brochado Martins J F,Guerreiro Viegas O,Cristescu R,et al. Outcome of selective root canal retreatment:A retrospective study[J]. Int Endod J,2023,56(3):345-355. DOI:10.1111/iej.13871.
[15]
张波,李霞,杨梦绮.根管再治疗过程中冲洗剂清除硅酸钙基根管封闭剂效果的研究进展[J].国际口腔医学杂志,2024,51(4):475-482. DOI:10.7518/gjkq.2024047.
[16]
贾舸,于淼,尚新华,等.根管治疗慢性根尖周炎5年预后及影响因素分析[J].上海口腔医学,2021,30(2):124-128. DOI:10.19439/j.sjos.2021.02.003.
[17]
李林光,吴幸晨. 220例牙髓病或根尖周患者根管治疗的根管预备和充填质量分析[J].川北医学院学报,2020,35(2):313-316. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-3697.2020.02.035.
[18]
Motiwala M A,Habib S,Ghafoor R,et al. Comparison of antimicrobial efficacy of Calcipex and Metapex in endodontic treatment of chronic apical periodontitis:A randomised controlled trial study protocol[J]. BMJ Open,2021,11(7):e048947. DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048947.
[1] 罗舒琪, 张丽君, 纪世召, 胡晓燕, 冯苹, 周万芳. 烧伤患者创伤后应激障碍的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2026, 21(05): 384-388.
[2] 江伟东, 陈博. 早发性可切除胃癌的临床病理特征及预后列线图模型的建立[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 230-237.
[3] 罗文勇, 黄文龙, 阮沁桐, 蔡莹, 王欣, 吴柱国, 王利玲, 于海兵. 甲状腺癌术后并发低钙血症的发病风险预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 257-264.
[4] 夏明宇, 刘光昊, 孙倩男, 刘宾, 王道荣. 基于炎症与营养指标的早发型直肠癌患者预后列线图的构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(05): 468-473.
[5] 杨进宝, 李伟, 张冰, 陈健, 王吉哲, 王玉佳, 王顺, 蒋志斌, 周烨, 杨建玲. 腹腔镜低位直肠癌适形保肛术技术难度的影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 343-346.
[6] 李若隐, 罗义, 张雪琳, 雷李凤, 李思丽. MDSCs相关基因在乳腺癌中表达特征分析与风险预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 366-373.
[7] 李文芳, 董孟炜, 杨万彭, 巴特, 南楠, 刘杨, 郝慧琴. 关节腔注射脂肪间充质干细胞对碘乙酸钠诱导大鼠急性软骨损伤的抗炎及组织学修复作用[J/OL]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(05): 266-277.
[8] 成津, 郭建明. 间充质干细胞治疗糖尿病足溃疡的研究现状与进展[J/OL]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(05): 278-284.
[9] 王平, 郝天骄, 陈兴宇, 翟俊, 朱文伟, 陈季松. 急性坏疽性胆囊炎临床风险预测模型的建立与验证[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(05): 760-767.
[10] 汪韬, 潘炳权, 郁林海. 经脐入路三通道腹腔镜胆囊切除术的安全性与疗效分析:附10 000例报告[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(05): 791-797.
[11] 李海波, 李洋, 曾涛, 冯程, 李华. 基于3期RCT中国人群数据的肝细胞癌一线治疗方案网状Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(04): 558-567.
[12] 韩晓钊, 杨能红, 韩民, 李永宁, 冉勋, 张宏, 何志伟, 罗加农, 喻超. 机器人与腹腔镜保留脾脏胰体尾切除术安全性及疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(04): 568-574.
[13] 曹佩佩, 叶峰, 丁静. 食管肿瘤内镜黏膜下剥离术后电凝综合征列线图预测模型的构建[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(05): 415-421.
[14] 郑月, 刘译阳, 袁梦晨, 尤亚茹, 李莉明, 张哲, 陈俣菘, 范松梅, 高剑波. 基于增强CT的列线图术前辅助性预测胃癌患者的EB病毒状态[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(05): 422-429.
[15] 宋宏伟, 张宇, 张珊珊. 四逆散联合西医治疗老年难治性胃食管反流病肝胃不和证患者的疗效及对细胞因子的影响研究[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(05): 452-456.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI
小
编
AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?