Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 9;16:478. doi: 10.1186/s12917-020-02691-y

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Mean RMS values at: 5, 15, 25, 50, 75, 85, and 95% of the total tibia length. a The mean RMS value in EFDM-CT at 5% of the total tibia length was significantly higher than those of the other six cross-sections. P < 0.0001. b The differences in mean RMS values in EGAS-FDM in the seven cross-sections were not significant