Corrigendum to “Bioactive Self‐Pumping Janus Fibrous Hydrogel Dressings with Aligned Microneedle Channels for Chronic Wound Healing”

S. Mehmood, I. Ullah, Z. Hussain, et al.: Bioactive Self-Pumping Janus Fibrous Hydrogel Dressings with Aligned Microneedle Channels for Chronic Wound Healing. Adv. Funct. Mater. e04317 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202504317 The authors sincerely apologize for an unintentional error in the originally published version of Figure 7D. The representative image for the cell line of the Janus scaffold group after 1 h of treatment in Figure 7D was mistakenly taken from a similar image of the Gauze group after 1 h of treatment. We have retrieved the correct original data and present the updated Figure 7 below. The authors apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused and confirm that the corresponding main text and scientific conclusions of the paper remain accurate and unaffected. Figure 7. In vitro wound healing analysis of SPFH scaffold. A) Representative images of the cell migration assay. B) Quantifying the in vitro wound closure rate for L929 cells treated with Gauze, Janus scaffold, and SPFH at various time intervals 0, 4, and 8 h (n = 5 biologically independent samples). C) EdU proliferation analysis when treated with Gauze, Janus scaffold, and SPFH. D) Representative images illustrating the in vitro angiogenesis. E–G) Quantifying the mesh count, mesh area, and master segment length for the Gauze, Janus scaffold, and SPFH-treated groups (n = 5 biologically independent samples). H) Quantitative analysis of the level of CD31 upon treating with Gauze, Janus, and SPFH scaffold (n = 3 biologically independent samples). I–K) Quantitative analysis of iNOS, IL-6, and TNF-𝛼 expression levels after Gauze, Janus scaffold, and SPFH groups in RAW 264.7 treated with LPS (n = 3biologically independent samples). ns, no significance, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, and ***p < 0.001. The authors sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused to the readers.