MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Bio-derived carbon-based materials for sustainable environmental remediation and wastewater treatment

Priya AK, Muruganandam M, Suresh S

Chemosphere, 2024 Jun 29;362:142731.
PMID: 38950744 DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.142731

Biosynthesized nanocomposites, particularly those incorporating carbon-based materials, exhibit exceptional tunability and multifunctionality, surpassing the capabilities of conventional materials in these aspects. Developing practical solutions is critical to address environmental toxins from pharmaceuticals, heavy metals, pesticides, and dyes. Biomass waste is a readily available carbon source, which emerges as a promising material for producing biochar due to its inherent advantages: abundance, low cost, and environmentally friendly nature. This distribution mainly uses carbon-based materials (CBMs) and biomass waste in wastewater treatment. This review paper investigates several CBM types, including carbon aerogels, nanotubes, graphene, and activated carbon. The development of bio-derived carbon-based nanomaterials are discussed, along with the properties and composition of carbon materials derived from biomass waste and various cycles, such as photodegradation, adsorption, and high-level oxidation processes for natural remediation. In conclusion, this review examines the challenges associated with biochar utilization, including cost, recovery, and practical implementation.
The war using microbes: A sustainable approach for wastewater management

Priya AK, Pachaiappan R, Kumar PS, Jalil AA, Vo DN, Rajendran S

Environ Pollut, 2021 Apr 15;275:116598.
PMID: 33581625 DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116598

Anthropogenic activities and population growth have resulted in a reduced availability of drinking water. To ensure consistency in the existence of drinking water, it is inevitable to establish wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). 70% of India's rural population was found to be without WWTP, waste disposal, and good sanitation. Wastewater has emerged from kitchens, washrooms, etc., with industry activities. This scenario caused severe damage to water resources, leading to degradation of water quality and pathogenic insects. Thus, it is a need of an hour to prompt for better WWTPs for both rural and urban areas. Many parts of the world have started to face severe water shortages in recent years, and wastewater reuse methods need to be updated. Clean water supply is not enough to satisfy the needs of the planet as a whole, and the majority of freshwater in the polar regions takes the form of ice and snow. The increasing population requires clean water for drinks, hygiene, irrigation, and various other applications. Lack of water and contamination of water result from human activities. 90% of wastewater is released to water systems without treatment in developing countries. Studies show that about 730 megatons of waste are annually discharged into water from sewages and other effluents. The sustenance of water resources, applying wastewater treatment technologies, and calling down the percentage of potable water has to be strictly guided by mankind. This review compares the treatment of domestic sewage to its working conditions, energy efficiency, etc. In this review, several treatment methods with different mechanisms involved in waste treatment, industrial effluents, recovery/recycling were discussed. The feasibility of bioaugmentation should eventually be tested through data from field implementation as an important technological challenge, and this analysis identifies many promising areas to be explored in the future.
Removing microplastics from wastewater using leading-edge treatment technologies: a solution to microplastic pollution-a review

Priya A, Anusha G, Thanigaivel S, Karthick A, Mohanavel V, Velmurugan P, et al.

Bioprocess Biosyst Eng, 2023 Mar;46(3):309-321.
PMID: 35301580 DOI: 10.1007/s00449-022-02715-x

Microplastics (MPs) in environmental studies have revealed that public sewage treatment plants are a common pathway for microplastics to reach local surroundings. Microplastics are becoming more of a worry, posing a danger to both marine wildlife and humans. These plastic items not only contribute to the macrocosmic proliferation of plastics but also the scattering of microplastics and the concentration of other micropollutant-containing objects, increasing the number of pollutants identified. Microplastics' behavior, movement, transformation, and persistence mechanisms, as well as their mode of action in various wastewater effluent treatment procedures, are still unknown. They are making microplastics made from wastewater a big deal. We know that microplastics enter wastewater treatment facilities (WWTPs), that wastewater is released into the atmosphere, and that this wastewater has been considered to represent a threat to habitats and ground character based on our literature assessment. The basic methods of wastewater and sewage sludge, as well as the treatment procedure and early characterization, are covered throughout the dissection of the problematic scientific conceptualization.
One-year Results of a Factorial Randomized Trial of Aspirin versus Placebo and Clonidine versus Placebo in Patients Having Noncardiac Surgery

Sessler DI, Conen D, Leslie K, Yusuf S, Popova E, Graham M, et al.

Anesthesiology, 2020 04;132(4):692-701.
PMID: 32022771 DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003158

BACKGROUND: The authors previously reported that perioperative aspirin and/or clonidine does not prevent a composite of death or myocardial infarction 30 days after noncardiac surgery. Moreover, aspirin increased the risk of major bleeding and clonidine caused hypotension and bradycardia. Whether these complications produce harm at 1 yr remains unknown.
METHODS: The authors randomized 10,010 patients with or at risk of atherosclerosis and scheduled for noncardiac surgery in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to clonidine/aspirin, clonidine/aspirin placebo, clonidine placebo/aspirin, or clonidine placebo/aspirin placebo. Patients started taking aspirin or placebo just before surgery; those not previously taking aspirin continued daily for 30 days, and those taking aspirin previously continued for 7 days. Patients were also randomly assigned to receive clonidine or placebo just before surgery, with the study drug continued for 72 h.
RESULTS: Neither aspirin nor clonidine had a significant effect on the primary 1-yr outcome, a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, with a 1-yr hazard ratio for aspirin of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.12; P = 0.948; 586 patients [11.8%] vs. 589 patients [11.8%]) and a hazard ratio for clonidine of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.20; P = 0.218; 608 patients [12.1%] vs. 567 patients [11.3%]), with effect on death or nonfatal infarction. Reduction in death and nonfatal myocardial infarction from aspirin in patients who previously had percutaneous coronary intervention at 30 days persisted at 1 yr. Specifically, the hazard ratio was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.95) in those with previous percutaneous coronary intervention and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.91to 1.16) in those without (interaction P = 0.033). There was no significant effect of either drug on death, cardiovascular complications, cancer, or chronic incisional pain at 1 yr (all P > 0.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Neither perioperative aspirin nor clonidine have significant long-term effects after noncardiac surgery. Perioperative aspirin in patients with previous percutaneous coronary intervention showed persistent benefit at 1 yr, a plausible sub-group effect.