Skip to main content
. 2012 Aug 27;11(2):215–222. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2012.01077.x

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Appearance of would healings and wound area (%) at 1, 4, 7 and 10 day after the treatment with (A, Inline graphic) gauze (negative control), (B, Inline graphic) 30/70 CS‐HOBt/PVA nanofibre mats, (C, Inline graphic) 30/70 CS‐TPP/PVA nanofibre mats, (D, Inline graphic) 30/70 CS‐EDTA/PVA nanofibre mats and (E, Inline graphic) commercial antibacterial gauze dressing (Sofra‐tulleregister) (positive control). Difference values * were statistically significant (P < 0·05) compared with gauze. The data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 6).