Additional file 1 of Fluoride-activated photothermal system for promoting bacteria-infected wound healing

Abstract

Additional file 1: Figure S1. a TEM, b High resolution TEM, and c Selected area electron diffraction (SAED) images of CeO2 NPs. Figure S2. HAADF-STEM image of CeO2 NPs with related elemental mappings of O and Ce. Figure S3. a XPS spectrum of CeO2 NPs. (b) XPS spectrum of Ce 3d. Figure S4. XRD patterns for CeO2 NPs. Figure S5. Absorption spectrum of CeO2, F-, TMB, CeO2+F-, CeO2+TMB and CeO2+F-+TMB at pH 4 after 30 min of reaction. Concentration: CeO2 (30 µg/mL), F- (5 mM), TMB (1 mM). The insert is the corresponding optical photograph (from left to right: CeO2, F-, TMB, CeO2+F-, CeO2+TMB and CeO2+F-+TMB). Figure S6. Optimizations of experiment condition. a Temperature change profiles of photothermal reaction with different concentrations of CeO2 NPs with or without fluoride ions. Effects of b pH and (C) NIR lamp power density. Figure S7. The absorption changes of CeO2+F-+TMB (CeO2: 30 µg/mL, F-: 5 mM, TMB: 1 mM) after the addition of GSH (1 mM) and 8-HQ (5 mM). Figure S8. Verification of the role of each module in the CeO2+F-+TMB system (CeO2: 30 µg/mL, F-: 5 mM, TMB: 1 mM). The concentrations of GSH and 8-HQ were 1 mM and 5 mM, respectively. Figure S9. Inhibition effect of CeO2+F-+TMB system. Figure S10. Selectivity investigation. All other anions concentrations were equal to the F- concentration (5 mM). Figure S11. a Photographs of bacterial colonies formed by E. coli after exposure to acetate buffer (Control), F-, TMB, CeO2, CeO2+F-, CeO2+TMB and CeO2+F-+TMB without/with NIR irradiation. Concentration: CeO2 (30 µg/mL), F- (400 µM), TMB (1 mM), acetate buffer (pH 4, 20 mM). b Statistical examination of survival rates of E. coli exposed to different samples without and with NIR irradiation. All data are presented as mean ± SD (n =3). Figure S12. a Colony photos of E. coli incubated with CeO2+TMB (CeO2: 30 µg/mL, TMB: 1 mM) with varying concentrations of fluoride ions (0, 10 µM, 50 µM, 200 µM, 400 µM) in the absence and presence of NIR light. (b) Statistical examination of survival rates of E. coli exposed to CeO2+TMB with varying fluoride ions concentrations without and with NIR irradiation. All data are presented as mean ± SD (n =3). Figure S13. The OD600 value of the supernatant as a function with the time after being treated by various conditions with E. coli. Concentration: CeO2 (30 µg/mL), F- (400 µM), TMB (1 mM). All data are presented as mean ± SD (n =3). Figure S14. SEM images of E. coli samples after treatments with Control, CeO2+TMB, CeO2+F-+TMB without/with NIR irradiation (Scale bar: 500 nm). Concentration: CeO2 (30 µg/mL), F- (400 µM), TMB (1 mM). Figure S15. Fluorescence images of E. coli samples after treatments with Control, CeO2+TMB, CeO2+F-+TMB without/with NIR irradiation (Scale bar: 20 μm). Concentration: CeO2 (30 µg/mL), F- (400 µM), TMB (1 mM). Figure S16. Samples test for cytotoxicity after 24 h of co-culture with NIH/3T3 cells. All data are presented as mean ± SD (n =3). Figure S17. Hemolysis test on water, normal saline, CeO2, CeO2+F-, CeO2+TMB, CeO2+F-+TMB. The insert is the optical photograph. Concentration: CeO2 (30 µg/mL), F- (400 µM), TMB (1 mM). Figure S18. a Infrared thermal pictures, and b the rise in temperature at the wound sites of mice at the designated periods under 808 nm NIR illumination (2.3 W/cm2) with treatments of CeO2+TMB (CeO2: 30 µg/mL, TMB: 1 mM). Error bars represent the standard deviation from the mean (n = 3). Figure S19. a Pictures depicting the progression of wound contraction from day 0 to day 12 in response to the treatments of CeO2+TMB + NIR group (808 nm, 2.3 W/cm2, 7 min). b The chart of the dynamic process of wound healing in CeO2+TMB + NIR group within 12 days. c Quantitative analysis of the wound size in CeO2+TMB + NIR group. Error bars represent the standard deviation from the mean (n = 3). Figure S20. The bacteria were separated from the wound tissue at different intervals and cultured on agar plates. Figure S21. a Pictures depicting the progression of wound contraction from day 0 to day 12 in response to penicillin G. b The chart of the dynamic process of wound healing within 12 days. c Quantitative analysis of the wound size within 12 days. d Comparison of wound size on day 12 with treatments of the penicillin G and CeO2+F-+TMB group. Error bars represent the standard deviation from the mean (n = 3). Figure S22. a H&E staining images of scar tissue thickness (Scale bar: the top of 200 µm and the bottom of 50 µm). b Quantification of scar tissue thickness. Error bars represent the standard deviation from the mean (n = 3). Figure S23. Body weights of different mice groups following treatment. All data are presented as mean ± SD (n =3). Concentration: CeO2 (30 µg/mL), F- (400 µM), TMB (1 mM).