Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

MAPS Oral Wound Healing Index Quantification.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

The “MAPS” Wound Healing Index.

A comprehensive framework for categorizing the key parameters of wound healing.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 2.

Horizontal bone gain outcome measurements using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Pearson’s correlation between bone gain at 3 mm below the edentulous crest (A).

Bone gains exploratory plots show approximately normally distributed (B).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 3.

Intra-examiner agreement summary statistics.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Inter-examiner agreement summary statistics.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Inter-reader agreement of each score.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Fig 3.

MAPS score changes over time at 3-, 10-, 21 days, and 5 months.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Case demonstration of compromised healing after guided bone regeneration procedure.

Top row shows clinical intraoral photography from baseline (BL), 3 days (D3), 10 days (10D), 21 days (D21), and 5 months (5M). Bottom row shows CBCT bone width measurements at baseline (BL), 5 months (5M). There is evidence of inferior bone gain seen in clinical photos over time due to compromised healing and shown in bone loss measurements in the follow-up CBCT.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Case demonstration of favorable healing after guided bone regeneration procedure.

Top row shows clinical intraoral photography from baseline (BL), 3 days (D3), 10 days (10D), 21 days (D21), and 5 months (5M). Bottom row shows CBCT bone width measurements at baseline (BL), 5 months (5M). There is clear evidence of superior bone gain seen in clinical photos over time due to optimal healing and shown in bone gain measurements in the follow-up CBCT.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Scatterplot of mean MAPS scores with bone gain at 3 mm at different time points.

The color scale bar indicates bone gain, where dark blue can be seen as negative bone gain (up to -2.5 mm), light blue no gain ( ~ 0 mm), dark green mild bone gain (up to 2.5 mm), light green moderate bone gain (up to 5 mm), and yellow high bone gain (>5 mm). Higher M,A, P at any time point is associated with higher bone gain.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Multiple Pearson’s correlations between bone gain and MAPS scores at 1, 3, and 5 mm at 10 days (A-C) and 21 days (D-F).

There is statistical significance of bone gain at 1, 3, and 5 mm at 10 and 21 days when compared to the MAPS score (p-value < 0.05). MAPS score correlated with bone changes after GBR procedures, indicating its potential for estimating hard tissue regenerative outcomes.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Lower (scores of 1-2), and higher (scores of 3-4) MAPS scores were correlated with bone gain measured in CBCT at 1, 3, and 5 mm.

There is statistical significance for bone gain at 3 mm when correlated with the grouped low and high MAPS scores (p-value < 0.005).

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Table 6.

Fit linear model at each time point with an individual average score of M, A, P, and from baseline to 5 months follow up at 3 mm level bone gain.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Fit Model Summary with dependent variables of the individual average score of M, A, P, and from baseline to 5 months follow up at 3 mm level bone gain.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Final predictive model.

More »

Table 8 Expand