Skip to main content
. 2012 Jan 6;9(3):330–343. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2011.00889.x

Table 1.

Histological analysis

Control (n = 16) Treatment (n = 16) Improvement
Wound surface Wound width (microscopic fields at 4× magnification) 1·00 ± 0·27 1·08 ± 0·19 N/C
Raised (+)/depressed (−) (−3 to 3) −1·00 ± 1·77 0·14 ± 1·68 Improved
Central protrusion (0–3) 0·13 ± 0·35 0·57 ± 0·98
Crusting/exudates (0–3) 1·63 ± 1·41 0·5 ± 1·07 Improved
Epidermis Coverage (estimated %) 79·4 ± 29·8 87·5 ± 31·5 Improved
Hyperplasia (multiple of normal epidermal thickness) 2·63 ± 0·74 2·29 ± 0·76 Improved
Maturity (1–4) 2·38 ± 0·91 3·13 ± 0·64 Improved
Granulation tissue/dermis Thickness (multiple of normal dermal thickness) 0·84 ± 0·76 1·13 ± 0·64 Improved
Inflammation/infiltration (0–3) 2·38 ± 0·74 2·13 ± 0·83 Improved
Maturity (0–4) 1·13 ± 0·83 1·88 ± 0·99 Improved