Marina Royón Gálvez

Mrs. Marina Royón Gálvez


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

2Years (2025-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
9 February 2025 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AGAlberto Gómez-Menchero
Alberto Gómez-Menchero
MGMarina Royón Gálvez
Marina Royón Gálvez
RARodrigo Andrés-García
Rodrigo Andrés-García
Mariano Herrero-ClimentMariano Herrero-Climent
Mariano Herrero-Climent
BRBlanca Ríos-Carrasco
Blanca Ríos-Carrasco
RSReyes Jaramillo Santos
Reyes Jaramillo Santos
Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological efficacy of minimally invasive surgical techniques for infraosseous defects by evaluating the effects of Emdogain (EMD) applied alone or with a xenograft, with a follow-up period of one year. Methods: Forty patients with a combined total of forty-eight intraosseous defects participated in the research. Of these, 20 participants were treated with EMD (group 1), and 28 were treated with EMD and a xenograft (group 2). The clinical measurements probing depth (PD), recession (REC), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were assessed at six sites on the tooth. Additionally, the following intraoperative clinical measurements were taken: (1) distance from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the bottom of the defect (CEJ-BD) and (2) distance from the CEJ to the most coronal extension of the interproximal bone crest (CEJ-BC). The infraosseous component of the defect was defined as INTRA = (CEJ-BD) − (CEJ-BC). Results: In comparison with the baseline, both treatment options showed statistically significant improvements in reducing PD and increasing CAL. The reduction in PD was 3.25 ± 0.786 mm for group 1 and 3.29 ± 1.013 mm for group 2. In terms of CAL gain, group 1 recorded a value of 4.65 ± 1.387 mm, compared with 5.07 ± 1.631 mm in group 2. Both groups showed a noticeable increase in radiographic bone filler, with an average of 69.85 ± 17.773%. Conclusions: The two regeneration techniques were both effective for the treatment of deep intraosseous defects, encouraging more substantial filling compared with preoperative levels.