Fig 1.
Effects of EM on body weight, food intake and water intake.
(I) Body weight changes at different weeks post-modeling. (II) Food intake changes at different weeks post-modeling. (III) Water intake changes at different weeks post-modeling. Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 8 rats. A: normal control group; B: OA model control group; C: positive control group; D: ELASEM®Flex group; E: ELASEM®ProFlex group. Bars with different letters indicate that they were statistically different at P < 0.05.
Fig 2.
Weekly effects of EM on MPT in rats after modeling.
Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 8 rats. A: normal control group; B: OA model control group; C: positive control group; D: ELASEM®Flex group; E: ELASEM®ProFlex group. Bars with different letters indicate that they were statistically different at P < 0.05.
Fig 3.
Effects on IL-1β, COX-2, and TNF-α levels at weeks 2 and 4 after modeling.
(I) IL-1β, COX-2, and TNF-α levels at weeks 2 after modeling; (II) IL-1β, COX-2, and TNF-α levels at weeks 4 after modeling. Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 8 rats. A: normal control group; B: OA model control group; C: positive control group; D: ELASEM®Flex group; E: ELASEM®ProFlex group. Bars with different letters indicate that they were statistically different at P < 0.05.
Fig 4.
Effects of EM on CTX-II levels at weeks 2 and 4 post-modeling.
Values are expressed as mean ± SD of 8 rats. A: normal control group; B: OA model control group; C: positive control group; D: ELASEM®Flex group; E: ELASEM®ProFlex group. Bars with different letters indicate that they were statistically different at P < 0.05.
Fig 5.
Histopathological examination results of rats in each group.
A: normal control group; B: OA model control group; C: positive control group; D: ELASEM®Flex group; E: ELASEM®ProFlex group. The three images in each group are the local panorama of HE staining, microscopic results of HE staining (200×), and Safranin-O fast green staining (50×). The scale bar for 200 × magnification is 50 μm, and 200 μm for 50 × magnification.
Table 1.
Mankin’s Score in Each Group.