Fig. 4: The sp-EMS potentiates the bactericidal effects by self-promoted electrostimulation in vitro.
From: Self-promoted electroactive biomimetic mineralized scaffolds for bacteria-infected bone regeneration
a Schematic diagram of the antibacterial mechanism of the sp-EMS. b (i) Representative CFU counting, live/dead staining, SEM, and TEM images of S. aureus seeded on the 6-well plate (blank), MS, and sp-EMS for 1 day. White arrows display the destruction of the cell membranes. (ii) Semiquantification of CFU counting and the bacteria number in SEM images in (i) (n = 3 biologically independent samples, by one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test: *P < 0.05, ***P < 0.001 versus blank; ##P < 0.01, ###P < 0.001 versus MS). c Representative CFU counting of S. aureus seeded on the sp-EMS, MS/AgCl, and MS/Ag2S for 1 day (n = 3 biologically independent samples, by one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test: ***P < 0.001 versus sp-EMS). d The release curve of Ag+ for 14 days. e Endogenous ROS level of S. aureus seeded on different scaffolds for 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h (n = 3 biologically independent samples). f Relative mRNA expressions of inflammatory-related markers (TNF-α and iNOS) and osteogenic differentiation markers (BMP2 and OCN) in BMSCs cultured on different scaffolds for 7 and 14 days (n = 3 biologically independent samples, by one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test: *P < 0.005, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 versus blank; ##P < 0.01, ###P < 0.001 versus MS). All experiments were repeated independently at least three times. Data are presented as means ± SD. Source data and exact P values are provided in the Source Data file.
