Table 1 mean and SD (approximated values) of absolute data measured on at the whole bone and at the gap level for the three groups. Anova and post-hoc test show where there was a significant difference.
Whole bone | LS | VFLS3 | VFLS6 | Anova | Post-hoc |
Callus volume [ccm] | 8.9 ± 1.6 | 12.5 ± 3.5 | 17.1 ± 5.1 | p = 0.0056 | VFLS6/LS (p = 0.0042) |
Callus density [mgHA/ccm] | 728 ± 32 | 748 ± 38 | 675 ± 17 | p = 0.0025 | VFLS6/LS (p = 0.022) VFLS6/VFLS3 (p = 0.0024) |
Trans callus volume [ccm] | 5.1 ± 1.5 | 6.2 ± 2.3 | 7.1 ± 1.8 | p = 0.200 | n.a. |
Cis callus volume [ccm] | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 6.2 ± 1.7 | 9.9 ± 4.0 | p = 0.0027 | VFLS6/LS (p = 0.0020) |
GAP | LS | VFLS3 | VFLS6 | Anova | Post-hoc |
Callus volume [ccm] | 6.0 ± 1.1 | 6.8 ± 1.3 | 9.3 ± 2.3 | p = 0.0087 | VFLS6/LS (p = 0.0089) VFLS6/VFLS3 (p = 0.0045) |
Callus density [mgHA/ccm] | 717 ± 34 | 730.8 ± 44.9 | 647.1 ± 20.5 | p = 0.0016 | VFLS6/LS (p = 0.0083) VFLS6/VFLS3 (p = 0.0021) |
Trans callus volume [ccm] | 3.7 ± 1.0 | 3.8 ± 1.1 | 4.4 ± 1.3 | p = 0.529 | n.a. |
Cis callus volume [ccm] | 2.3 ± 0.3 | 3.0 ± 0.6 | 4.9 ± 1.3 | p = 0.0003 | VFLS6/LS (p = 0.0003) VFLS6/VFLS3 (p = 0.0044) |