. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 May 15.

Published in final edited form as: Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Nov;136(11):1127–1131. doi: 10.1001/archoto.2010.192

Table 1.

Table Comparison of Disease in the ALF- and PBS-Treated Animal Groups

Middle/Inner Ear Parameters	Type of Treatment		P Value
Middle/Inner Ear Parameters	PBS	ALF	P Value
Bacterial plate count of MEE^a	14 (3) [n = 7]	2 (1) [n = 7]	.005
RWM thickness, μm^a	29.6 (1.7) [n = 6]	22.4 (1.9) [n = 6]	.11
RWM inflammatory cells, all types/area^a	43 (6) [n = 6)	15 (6) [n = 6]	.047
ST inflammatory cells, all types/area adjacent to RWM^a	62 (38) [n = 6]	12 (6) [n = 6]	.27
Bacteria in RWM^b	5 of 5	1 of 6	NA
ST bacteria adjacent to RWM^b	3 of 5	1 of 6	NA
Hair cell damage^b	4 of 6	3 of 8	NA
Stria vascularis damage^b	3 of 6	2 of 8	NA
Bacteria in area of neurons^b	4 of 6	2 of 8	NA

Abbreviations: ALF, apolactoferrin; MEE, middle ear effusion; n, number of ears used in statistical analysis; NA, not applicable; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; RWM, round window membrane; ST, scala tympani.

Values are given as mean (SE).

Data are given as the number of ears involved. Nonparametric test was not performed because of the small number of animals; however; the percentage of ears with these pathologic changes have a trend to be higher in PBS-treated animals compared with those treated with ALF.