Table 2.
Laminar distribution | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cases | Pathology | U | L | U > L | U = L | U < L | NS |
CTE | NFT | 8 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 14 |
NT | 13 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 12 | |
DLG | 19 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
AT | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | |
EN | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | |
SN | 7 | 0 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 10 | |
Vac | 16 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 8 | |
NP | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
CTE/ADNC | NFT | 20 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 26 |
NT | 19 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 14 | |
DLG | 25 | 0 | 16 | 5 | 1 | 7 | |
AT | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 21 | |
EN | 2 | 10 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 38 | |
SN | 18 | 2 | 11 | 9 | 0 | 16 | |
Vac | 30 | 5 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 6 | |
NP | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
ADNC | NFT | 4 | 4 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 35 |
NT | 4 | 17 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 11 | |
DLG | 10 | 2 | 21 | 5 | 2 | 4 | |
AT | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
EN | 2 | 17 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 29 | |
SN | 19 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 24 | |
Vac | 32 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 11 | |
NP | 13 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
Comparison of frequencies (χ2 contingency tables). CTE compared with CTE/ADNC: NFT χ2 = 3.86 (4DF, P > 0.05), NT χ2 = 3.70 (5DF, P > 0.05), DLG χ2 = 10.67 (5DF, P > 0.05); AT χ2 = 6.44 (4DF, P > 0.05), EN χ2 = 2.61 (3DF, P > 0.05), SN χ2 = 5.55 (5DF, P > 0.05), Vac χ2 = 12.72 (5DF, P < 0.05); Totals for CTE compared with ADNC: NFT χ2 = 15.34 (4DF, P < 0.01), NT χ2 = 28.06 (5DF, P < 0.001), DLG χ2 = 12.15 (5DF, P < 0.05), AT χ2 = 18.70 (5DF, P > 0.01), EN χ2 = 1.41 (4DF, P > 0.05), SN χ2 = 16.12 (5DF, P < 0.01), Vac χ2 = 4.45 (6DF, P > 0.05)