pone.0298640.g001.tif (762.65 kB)
Comparison of the olfactory epithelial thickness in the saline and CGF groups.
figure
posted on 2024-02-28, 18:31 authored by Naruhiko Kai, Naoya Nishida, Kunihide Aoishi, Taro Takagi, Naohito HatoLeft: Representative images of hematoxylin-eosin staining of the olfactory epithelium in the control, saline, and CGF groups on day 28 are shown. Right: The olfactory epithelial thickness is thicker in the CGF group than in the saline group (P = 0.013). However, it is not improved compared with the thickness of the control group. CGF, concentrated growth factor.
History
Usage metrics
Categories
Keywords
concentrated growth factorsbehavioral assessments using90 ± 984 ± 429 ± 9olfactory marker proteinolfactory epithelial thicknesses64 ± 308 ± 300 ± 3significantly increased compared4 2 0 × 10olfactory dysfunction modelsaline group (<olfactory dysfunctionolfactory epitheliumsignificantly thickerrat modelimprovement comparedsaline groupcontrol groupp xlink ">two groupsstudy aimedsignificant differenceseven animalssaline groupssaline administrationregenerative capacityrandomly dividedintraperitoneally injectedintraperitoneal administrationintranasal administrationhistological evaluationgroups showedfive animalsday 28cell countavoidance test28 days013 ).009 ).
Licence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC