Skip to main content
. 2009 Oct 14;15(38):4799–4805. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.4799

Table 1.

Changes on the esophageal and gastric histomorphometry in RE rats

Group Damage protecting percentages (%) Inflammatory cells infiltration in esophagus (%) Thickness of mucosa in esophagus (μm) Hemorrhage depth in stomach (mm)
Controls
Sham 1.23 ± 0.13 0.86 ± 0.7 261.89 ± 23.67 0.003 ± 0.005
RE 12.72 ± 3.81b 94.80 ± 4.07b 20.81 ± 46.53b 0.963 ± 0.343
α-tocopherol 29.15 ± 10.23bc 72.53 ± 1.17bd 57.12 ± 43.83b 0.19 ± 0.11bd
LF extracts (mg/kg)
125 24.86 ± 4.8bd 78.92 ± 10.42bc 138.56 ± 48.8ad 0.13 ± 0.08bd
250 26.56 ± 8.8bc 68.31 ± 10.79bd 99.75 ± 85.6b 0.18 ± 0.08bd
500 46.41 ± 17.77bc 56.11 ± 4.05bd 118.64 ± 80.38ac 0.25 ± 0.18bd

Values are expressed mean ± SD of five rats;

a

P < 0.05 and

b

P < 0.01 compared to sham control;

c

P < 0.05 and

d

P < 0.01 compared to RE control; RE: Reflux esophagitis; LF: Lonicerae Flos.

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure