Dear editor,
I have some comments about the article that author
discussed: “relatively high vasoconstrictive activity of
levobupivacaine at the beginning of the wound-healing
process might have resulted in low tissue perfusion and
delayed epidermal and dermal regeneration”, but the
levobupivacaine has vasodilation property. (Menezes et
al., 2016) How author was concluded to such matter. The
second: in statistical analysis author wrote “statistically
significant at a p value of <0.05” but in Table 2, p<0.01
was indicated. There was no uniformity of confidence
level in statistical analysis. The third: statistical analysis
of the histopathological study was done of nine rats but
in Table 2, n=10 were written for Group B, C, and L.
There will be required to carry out further Kruskal-
Wallis test for epidermal regeneration, granulation
tissue thickness, and angiogenesis by taking n=9. This
will alter p-value too. The forth: The experimental
protocol was approved by the Institutional Animal Care
and Use Committee of Marmara University, Istanbul,
Turkey, but protocol/ reference number was missing.
This indicated that study was bogus. If author is right
the about study, then publish this letter to the editor with the certificate of animal ethics committee approval
indicating protocol number.
Bölüm | Basic Medical Sciences |
---|---|
Yazarlar | |
Yayımlanma Tarihi | 8 Eylül 2017 |
Gönderilme Tarihi | 7 Eylül 2017 |
Kabul Tarihi | 16 Şubat 2017 |
Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2017 Cilt: 34 Sayı: 2 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.