Fig. 5: In vivo therapeutic efficacy evaluation of FFs-ICG hydrogel in an MRSA-infected prosthetic joint implants (PJI) model in mice.
From: Photo-reversible amyloid nanoNETs for regenerative antimicrobial therapies
a Schematic timeline to assess the therapeutic efficiency of FFs-ICG hydrogel in the MRSA-infected PJI model. Created in BioRender. Xuan, Q. (2025) https://BioRender.com/e9mjxve. SEM images of MRSA biofilm (b) on the surface of knee prosthesis at day 14. (Scale bars: 1 μm) CFU quantification (n = 3) of the joint peri-implant tissues (c) and bone (d) at day 14 in the PJI model. Lys (p = 0.2910), RFs (p = 0.0102), FFs (p = 0.0022), ICG (p = 0.0057), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0047), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0007) vs. PBS control in (c). Lys (p = 0.0109), RFs (p = 0.0055), FFs (p = 0.0024), ICG (p = 0.0028), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0015), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0004) vs. PBS control in (d). e Diameter of infected knee joints in PJI mice at days 0, 3, 5, 7, and 14 (n = 3 for each time point). f Axial, coronal, sagittal, and 3D reconstruction micro-CT images 4 weeks after MRSA infection. The mouse tibias are shown in dark yellow, and the implant is shown in light yellow. Quantitative micro-CT analysis including the bone volume/total volume (BV/TV) (g), and trabecular thickness (TB.TH) (h) (n = 3; data are presented as individual points). Non-infected (p = 0.0017), Lys (p = 0.4128), RFs (p = 0.2015), FFs (p = 0.1380), ICG (p = 0.0546), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0483), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0210) vs. PBS control in (g). Non-infected (p = 0.0047), Lys (p = 0.3736), RFs (p = 0.1981), FFs (p = 0.3106), ICG (p = 0.0090), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0062), FFs-ICG (p < 0.0001) vs. PBS control in (h). i Quantitative analysis of mouse knee-bending angle 4 weeks after infection (n = 4; data are presented as individual points). Non-infected (p = 0.0049), Lys (p = 0.4772), RFs (p = 0.1855), FFs (p = 0.2831), ICG (p = 0.0083), RFs-ICG (p = 0.1757), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0207) vs. PBS control. j–k Gait analysis showing actual mice walking trajectory and footprint imaging. Green for left hind footprints; pink for right hind footprints (j). 3D reconstruction of left hind paw of mice in each group, with color-coded pressure intensity of the mouse’s footprints (k). Quantitative gait analysis and the parameters: support time (l), stride length (m), average intensity (n) (average pressure on the runway), and average speed (o) (n = 4, data are presented as individual points). Non-infected (p = 0.0081), Lys (p = 0.00394), RFs (p = 0.0026), FFs (p = 0.0016), ICG (p = 0.0039), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0068), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0008) vs. PBS control in (l). Non-infected (p = 0.0009), Lys (p = 0.0125), RFs (p = 0.0165), FFs (p = 0.0086), ICG (p = 0.0017), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0029), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0014) vs. PBS control in (m). Non-infected (p = 0.0005), Lys (p = 0.0183), RFs (p = 0.3766), FFs (p = 0.0069), ICG (p = 0.0010), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0018), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0033) vs. PBS control in n. Non-infected (p = 0.0104), Lys (p = 0.0329), RFs (p = 0.1638), FFs (p = 0.0182), ICG (p = 0.0368), RFs-ICG (p = 0.0319), FFs-ICG (p = 0.0323) vs. PBS control in (o). The data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (S.D). Statistical significance was analyzed by one-way ANOVA using GraphPad Prism 8, followed by Tukey’s post hoc test for pairwise comparisons. Statistical significance was defined as *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
