Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparisons of the wet mass of bilateral tricipital muscles(g,—X ± s)

From: The effects of different tensile parameters for the neurodynamic mobilization technique on tricipital muscle wet weight and MuRf-1 expression in rabbits with sciatic nerve injury

Group

Lesion lateral

Normal lateral

Sham group(n = 6)

6.57 ± 0.08

6.65 ± 0.14

Model group(n = 6)

2.48 ± 0.13*

6.73 ± 0.08

NMT-A group(n = 6)

3.27 ± 0.10#

6.67 ± 0.10

NMT-B group(n = 6)

4.07 ± 0.12▲

6.72 ± 0.10

NMT-C group(n = 6)

2.52 ± 0.10☆

6.65 ± 0.10

  1. Lesioned lateral compared with normal lateral muscle, *#▲☆p < 0.05 in the model, NMT-B, NMT-A, and NMT-C group, respectively.
  2. In the lesioned lateral, the wet mass of muscle in the model, NMT-B, NMT-A, and NMT-C group compared with in the sham group, *#▲☆p < 0.05; wet mass of muscle in the NMT-B and NMT-A compared with in the model group, #▲p < 0.05; the wet mass of muscle in the NMT-B compared with in the NMT-A and NMT-C group, # ☆p < 0.05.