For the histological analysis, the separated tendon unit was embedded in paraffin and sections of thickness five microns (5 μ) were cut longitudinally and transversally. The slides were viewed at magnifications of 100×, 200× and 400× after they had been stained using a preparation of hematoxylin-eosin (HE), in order to observe the alterations to the collagen fiber bundles and to the nuclei and cytoplasm of the fibrocytes and fibroblasts. The parameters of cellularity, collagen thickness, occurrences of edema and vascular proliferation were evaluated and categorized as scores of 0, 1, 2 or 3, as described in a previous study.15 These parameters or histological indicators were examined in order to demonstrate the behavior of the tendon after the interventions made in this study. All the analyses were performed by a single pathologist, who was unaware of the respective treatment groups of the animals from which the samples were obtained.
The data are presented as the mean ± SEM (standard error of the mean), for values obtained from ordinal variables (tension in N, to evaluate the resistance of the tendon) or the median for categorical variables (degree of inflammation). The analysis was performed using GraphPad Instat 4.0®, using one or two-way ANOVA followed by the Kruskal–Wallis or Bonferroni test, respectively. p-Values < 0.05 were taken to be significant.
The data are presented as the mean ± SEM (standard error of the mean), for values obtained from ordinal variables (tension in N, to evaluate the resistance of the tendon) or the median for categorical variables (degree of inflammation). The analysis was performed using GraphPad Instat 4.0®, using one or two-way ANOVA followed by the Kruskal–Wallis or Bonferroni test, respectively. p-Values < 0.05 were taken to be significant.