Amanda Rodriguez, Diego Velasquez, Leonardo Marquez, Jose Maria Ramos, Nataly Zambrana, Maria Masotti, Oliver Kripfgans, Hsun-Liang Chan
{"title":"Introduction of \"MAPS\" wound healing index and its correlation with guided bone regeneration outcome.","authors":"Amanda Rodriguez, Diego Velasquez, Leonardo Marquez, Jose Maria Ramos, Nataly Zambrana, Maria Masotti, Oliver Kripfgans, Hsun-Liang Chan","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0319271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Methods: </strong>The MAPS score was introduced to evaluate the bioMechanical, Aesthetic/Anatomical, Pathophysiologic, and Subject-related parameters for the healing assessment of 20 patients who underwent GBR in the posterior mandible retrospectively. Intraoral photography was taken at 3-, 10-, 21 days, and 5 months, resulting in 80 follow-up visits. Two independent examiners evaluated the photos giving scores for each timepoint and tested against horizontal bone gain (CBCT) for predictability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cohen's Kappa values showed high intra- and inter-examiner agreement. Pearson's correlation showed an inverse correlation between baseline bone width and bone changes at a 3 mm level (R2 = 0.23). The higher M, A, and P values at any time point were associated with higher bone gain. The 10-day MAPS score turns out the most predictive of bone gain (RMSE 1.32, R2 0.75). In addition, increasing the average P score by 1 point at 10 days is associated with an increase in bone gain of 1.23 (p=.057).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MAPS score improves consistently over the 5-month healing period. However, no statistically significant difference is observed between the scores at 21 days and 5 months, reflecting the clinical healing pattern for GBR. The overall MAPS score correlated with bone changes after GBR procedures, indicating its potential for estimating hard tissue regenerative outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 3","pages":"e0319271"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11925305/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319271","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Methods: The MAPS score was introduced to evaluate the bioMechanical, Aesthetic/Anatomical, Pathophysiologic, and Subject-related parameters for the healing assessment of 20 patients who underwent GBR in the posterior mandible retrospectively. Intraoral photography was taken at 3-, 10-, 21 days, and 5 months, resulting in 80 follow-up visits. Two independent examiners evaluated the photos giving scores for each timepoint and tested against horizontal bone gain (CBCT) for predictability.
Results: Cohen's Kappa values showed high intra- and inter-examiner agreement. Pearson's correlation showed an inverse correlation between baseline bone width and bone changes at a 3 mm level (R2 = 0.23). The higher M, A, and P values at any time point were associated with higher bone gain. The 10-day MAPS score turns out the most predictive of bone gain (RMSE 1.32, R2 0.75). In addition, increasing the average P score by 1 point at 10 days is associated with an increase in bone gain of 1.23 (p=.057).
Conclusion: The MAPS score improves consistently over the 5-month healing period. However, no statistically significant difference is observed between the scores at 21 days and 5 months, reflecting the clinical healing pattern for GBR. The overall MAPS score correlated with bone changes after GBR procedures, indicating its potential for estimating hard tissue regenerative outcomes.
期刊介绍:
PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides:
* Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright
* Fast publication times
* Peer review by expert, practicing researchers
* Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact
* Community-based dialogue on articles
* Worldwide media coverage