Fig. 6

Histopathological examination of hind paws from rats treated with neostigmine with/ without diclofenac or celecoxib. a normal hind paw tissue showing no inflammation, b positive control showing marked inflammation and lympho-histocytic infiltration, c diclofenac treated rats with very minimal inflammation, d neostigmine treated rats showing moderate inflammation and lympho-histocytic infiltration (arrow), e neostigmine + diclofenac treated rats showing moderate inflammation and lympho-histocytic infiltration, f celecoxib treated rats showing mild inflammation and lympho-histocytic infiltration, g neostigmine + celecoxib treated rats showing moderate inflammation and lympho-histocytic infiltration, h number of inflammatory cells per high power field showing statistically significant difference between all different groups; except Diclo and Cele were not significantly different from each other. Values are presented as mean ± SD. Data are compared with normal [N], positive control [C], neostigmine [Neo], diclofenac [Diclo], celecoxib [Cele], neostigmine + diclofenac [Neo + Diclo], and neostigmine + celecoxib [Neo + Cele] using ANOVA, followed by Tukey multiple comparison post hoc test at p < 0.05. Low power views (x100) of the photomicrographs are present in Supplementary file (2)