## 3 Results  
The follow-up of the goats showed no changes in their habits. All goats are and drank well throughout the study except for one goat who got sick for 8 days and died; therefore, four specimens in the CS/SIM-1-month group were excluded. The scoring results of the histological findings are summarized in Table 1.  
Overall, an index was created between the experimental groups to combine inflammation quantification (score 0-3), inflammatory cells type (0 = absent, 1 = present), bone formation (1 = present), osteoclast activity (1 = present), ankyloses (1 = present), foreign body reaction (1 = present), and granulation tissue (1 = present). The index theoretically ranged from 0 to 9, with a lower score representing fewer complications. At 1 month, the CL group showed the best results with no statistical significance (\(p\) = 0.242) (Table 2). At 3 months, CS without SIM showed significantly better results compared to other groups (\(p\) = 0.040) (Table 3). When both time periods were compared for each group, the CL subgroups showed more bone formation at 3 months with no statistically significant difference. Meanwhile, the CS/SIM group showed a 100% rate of osteocl activity at 1 month and a statistically significant 0% rate at 3 months (\(p\) = 0.028). Histological sections for experimental groups showed lymphocytic inflammatory infiltrate at the 1-month period without noteworthy foreign body reaction (Figure 3). Later, the 3-month sections revealed less inflammation and more fibrosis, mineralized tissue, and hard tissue formation with prominent reversal lines (Figure 4). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Time**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Group**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **No. of** \\ **Specimen** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Inflammation Quantification (\%)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Presence of** \\ **Bone** \\ **Formation (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Presence of** \\ **Ostocalistic** \\ **Activity (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Presence of** \\ **Foreign Body** \\ **Reaction (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Presence of** \\ **Translue (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \cline{5-10}  & & & \textless{}10\% & 10–30\% & 30–50\% & \textgreater{}50\% & \textgreater{}50\% & \textless{} & \textless{} \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{1 Month} & +ve & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\  & \begin{tabular}{c} \textless{}1 \\ \textless{}5 \\ \textless{}5 \\ \end{tabular} & 8 & 88 & 0 & 0 & 12 & 0 & 12 & 0 & 12 \\  & \begin{tabular}{c} CS \\ \textless{}5/SIM \\ \end{tabular} & 4 & 50 & 50 & 0 & 0 & 50 & 100 & 0 \\  & \begin{tabular}{c} \textless{}1 \\ \textless{}5 \\ \textless{}5/SIM \\ \end{tabular} & 2 & 50 & 50 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\  & \
\begin{tabular}{c} \textless{}1 \\ \textless{}5 \\ \end{tabular} & 8 & 80 & 0 & 50 & 50 & 0 & 25 & 50 \\  &
\begin{tabular}{c} CS \\ \textless{}5/SIM \\ \end{tabular} & 8 & 72 & 0 & 14 & 14 & 14 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Histological section outcome of perforation repair with different test scaffolds. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Index**} & \begin{tabular}{c} **CL** \\ **(\(\mathbf{n=8}\))** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **CS** \\ **(\(\mathbf{n=8}\))** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **CS with SIM** \\ **(\(\mathbf{n=4}\))** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Kruskal-Wallis** \\ **Test Results** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Median (IQR) & 0 (0–0.75) & 1 (0–2.75) & 2.5 (1–4) & \(p\) = 0.242 \\ Range & 0–5 & 0–3 & 1–4 & \\ \hline CL: CollaCote; CS: Chitosan; SIM: Simvastatin; SD: Standard Deviation; IQR: interquartile range. \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Index summary between the experimental groups at 1 month.