Basic Research
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2004.
World J Gastroenterol. Dec 15, 2004; 10(24): 3616-3620
Published online Dec 15, 2004. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v10.i24.3616
Figure 1
Figure 1 Repeated treatment with AMG on gastric mucosal damage in normal mice (n = 10). bP < 0.01 vs TOL.
Figure 2
Figure 2 Effect of AMG on ethanol-induced gastric mucosal damage model (n = 10). aP < 0.05, bP < 0.01 vs model; cP < 0.05, AMG (300 mg/kg) vs TOL.
Figure 3
Figure 3 Light and electronic microscopy assessments of ethanol-induced gastric lesion. A: light microsocopy assessment of ethanol-induced gastric lesion (*100). A: normal group, B: model group, C: ToL group, D: AMG (300 mg/kg) group E: AMG (150 mg/kg) group, F: AMG (75 mg/kg) group. B: Electronic microscopy assessment of ethanol-induced gastric lesion (× 6000) G: normal group, H: model group, I: TOL group, J: AMG (300 mg/kg) group, K: AMG (150 mg/kg) group, L: AMG (75 mg/kg) group.