Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Schematic diagram of the pipe casing (A) and the drift angle stylet (B).
- Figure 2.
Comparison between the mucosa injured and mucosa uninjured urinary bladder. A: mucosa uninjured; B: mucosa injured. The bladders were injected with physiological saline.
- Figure 3.
Comparison between the early-stage tumor and advanced-stage tumor on the urinary bladder. A: tumor formation in the early stage; B: tumor formation in the advanced stage.
- Figure 4.
Metastasis in the liver (A) and the kidney (B).
- Figure 5.
Survival time function of the T739 mice (A) and Balb/C-nu-nu nude mice (B).
- Figure 6.
Pathological images of different groups. A: The normal control group bladder (H&E staining, ×100); B: The model group bladder with tumor (H&E staining, ×100); C: The metastasis in liver (H&E staining, ×200); D: The metastasis in kidney (H&E staining, ×200).
Tables
- Table 1.
Comparison of tumor incidence between the mucosa uninjured bladder and mucosa injured bladder by drift angle stylet.
Groups Number of mice Cell inoculation amount Tumor developed amount Tumor incidence (%) T739 without injury 10 1×106 0 0 T739 with injury 60 1×106 60 100 Balb/C-nu-nu without injury 10 1×106 0 0 Balb/C-nu-nu with injury 60 1×106 60 100 - Table 2.
Average survival time and bladder weight of the mice transplanted with tumor cells.
Groups Number of mice Average survival time (days) Average tumor wet weight T739 without injury 10 >40 0.02±0.22 T739 with injury 60 26.69±9.24 0.54±0.37 Balb/C-nu-nu without injury 10 >60 0.02±0.32 Balb/C-nu-nu with injury 60 34.59±9.80 0.11±0.13
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.