A Novel P@SiO2 Nano-Composite as Effective Adsorbent to Remove Methylene Blue Dye from Aqueous Media.

This work aims to prepare a novel phosphate-embedded silica nanoparticles (P@SiO2) nanocomposite as an effective adsorbent through a hydrothermal route. Firstly, a mixed solution of sodium silicate and sodium phosphate was passed through a strong acidic resin to convert it into hydrogen form. After that, the resultant solution was hydrothermally treated to yield P@SiO2 nanocomposite. Using kinetic studies, methylene blue (MB) dye was selected to study the removal behavior of the P@SiO2 nanocomposite. The obtained composite was characterized using several advanced techniques. The experimental results showed rapid kinetic adsorption where the equilibrium was reached within 100 s, and the pseudo-second-order fitted well with experimental data. Moreover, according to Langmuir, one gram of P@SiO2 nanocomposite can remove 76.92 mg of the methylene blue dye. The thermodynamic studies showed that the adsorption process was spontaneous, exothermic, and ordered at the solid/solution interface. Finally, the results indicated that the presence of NaCl did not impact the adsorption behavior of MB dye. Due to the significant efficiency and promising properties of the prepared P@SiO2 nanocomposite, it could be used as an effective adsorbent material to remove various cationic forms of pollutants from aqueous solutions in future works.

A Review of the Clinical Subgroup Analyses From the RE-LY Trial.

Dabigatran was the first direct-acting oral anticoagulant approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in people with atrial fibrillation, based on data from the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial. Over 18,000 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and a moderate-to-high risk of thromboembolic stroke were randomized to warfarin or dabigatran. With respect to the primary endpoints for efficacy and safety, dabigatran was superior to warfarin in the prevention of stroke and thromboembolism and noninferior with respect to major bleeding. Although unified by a common arrhythmia and a similar thromboembolic stroke risk, this large patient population is also significantly heterogeneous with respect to other demographics and comorbidities that raise important questions about the efficacy and safety of dabigatran in specific patient populations. Furthermore, there were significant differences between the warfarin and dabigatran groups with respect to several important secondary endpoints. Understanding the differences in outcomes between specific patient subgroups from the RE-LY trial can better inform the practicing clinician's ability to offer the best anticoagulation options to individual patients.

Adherence to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for the management of anticoagulation in patients with mechanical valves undergoing elective outpatient procedures.

This study sought to establish the practice patterns of a diverse group of academic physicians, in the management of periprocedural anticoagulation for patients with mechanical heart valves, to study adherence to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines. Physicians (n = 140) were surveyed to assess strategies for the periprocedural anticoagulation of patients with bileaflet mechanical heart valves undergoing 2 common outpatient procedures. Six patient scenarios with graded risk profiles were presented for each valve location (mitral and aortic). In >90% of high-risk patient scenarios, for which the ACC/AHA guidelines recommend periprocedural anticoagulation, anticoagulation was recommended, with minimal differences between physician specialties. However, periprocedural anticoagulation was also recommended in >70% of non-high-risk scenarios, for which the ACC/AHA guidelines recommend no periprocedural anticoagulation. Noncardiologists recommended anticoagulation more often in non-high-risk patients (p <0.01), especially for patients with aortic valve prostheses. Thus, academic physicians appropriately recommend periprocedural anticoagulation for high-risk patients with mechanical heart valves who undergo elective procedures. However, these data specifically suggest variability in practice for non-high-risk patients that are discordant with current ACC/AHA guidelines, with differences by treating specialty especially notable in this risk subset.