Comparison of two different laparotomy methods for modeling rabbit VX2 hepatocarcinoma

Table 1 Comparison of the operation time and incision size between the traditional laparotomy method and the modified laparotomy method (t test, mean ± SD)

Group	Mean operation time (min)	Mean incision size (cm)
A (traditional laparotomy method)	21.2 ± 2.6	3.3 ± 0.5
B (modified laparotomy method)	17.6 ± 2.4	2.6 ± 0.4
t test	3.903	2.928
P value	0.001	0.007

Table 2 Comparison of incision infections and the mortality rates between the traditional laparotomy method and the modified laparotomy method (Fisher exact test)

Group	Number of infected rabbits	Number of non-infected rabbits	Postoperative incision infection rate (%)	Mortality in each group	Survival in each group	Mortality rate (%)
A (traditional laparotomy method)	2	9	18.2	5	10	33.3
B (modified laparotomy method)	1	14	6.7	0	15	0
P value			0.556			0.042

Table 3 Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging findings between the traditional laparotomy method and the modified laparotomy method (Fisher exact test)

Group	Successfully implanted	Unsuccessfully implanted	Successful implantation rate	With celiac implantation	No celiac implantation	Celiac implantation rate	With abdominal wall invasion	No abdominal wall invasion	Abdominal wall invasion rate
A (traditional laparotomy method)	9	1	90%	6	4	60%	5	5	50%
B (modified laparotomy method)	14	1	93.3%	2	13	13.3%	1	14	6.7%
P value			1			0.028			0.023