. 2018 Dec 18;12:501. doi: 10.3389/fncel.2018.00501

Table 2.

Quantitative clinical and functional recovery results.

Groups n = 5 each	% Self-amputations	% Neurotrophic ulcers	% Neurotrophic ulcers (>2 mm)	Foot length (mm)	Pinch test	Toe spread test
4 weeks postsurgical analyses
CTR-native	0.00	0.00	0.00	–	3.00 ± 0.00	3.00 ± 0.00
Auto	80.00^a	60.00^a,b,d,e	66.67^a,b,d,e	–	1.60 ± 0.55^a,e	0.00 ± 0.00^a
Nano	20.00^e	0.00^b,e	0.00^b	–	2.00 ± 0.71^a,c,e	0.40 ± 0.55^a
Coll-Nano	20.00^e	0.00^d	0.00^d	–	0.80 ± 0.84^a,c	0.00 ± 0.00^a
12 weeks postsurgical analyses
CTR-native	0.00	0.00	0.00	39.17 ± 2.04	3.00 ± 0.00	3.00 ± 0.00
Auto	80.00^a	20.00^e	100.00^a,b,d,e	34.01 ± 2.47^a,d	1.00 ± 0.71^a,e	0.20 ± 0.45^a
Nano	60.00^a,e	40.00^e	50.00^b,e	37.39 ± 2.57	1.6 ± 0.55^a,e	1.00 ± 0.71^a,c
Coll-Nano	40.00^e	0.00	0.00^d	40.04 ± 1.67^d	1.40 ± 0.55^a	0.00 ± 0.00^a,c

The table shows all quantitative results conducted at 4 and 12 weeks followed peripheral nerve repair. Self-amputations and neurotrophic ulcers results are expressed in percentage, while the foot length, pinch and toe spread tests results are shown as mean ± standard deviation values. In this study, p < 0.05 values were considered statistically significant in two tailed tests. Significant differences are indicated as follows: ^aSignificant differences with CTR group. ^bSignificant differences between Auto vs. Nano group. ^cSignificant differences between Nano vs. Coll-Nano group. ^dSignificant differences between Auto vs Coll-Nano group. ^eSignificant differences between 4 weeks vs 12 weeks for each condition.