Bipolar anodic electrochemical exfoliation of graphite powders

The electrochemical exfoliation of graphite has attracted considerable attention as a method for large-scale, rapid production of graphene and graphene oxide (GO). As exfoliation typically requires direct electrical contact, and is limited by the shape and/or size of the starting graphite, treatment of small graphite particles and powders, the typical form available commercially, is extremely difficult. In this study, GO nanosheets were successfully prepared from small graphite particles and powders by a bipolar electrochemical process. Graphite samples were placed between two platinum feeder electrodes, and a constant current was applied between the feeder electrodes using dilute sulfuric acid as the electrolyte. Optical microscopy, atomic force microscopy, X-ray diffractometry, Raman spectroscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy were employed to examine the samples obtained after electrolysis. The results obtained from these analyses confirmed that anodic electrochemical exfoliation occurs in the graphite samples, and the exfoliated samples are basically highly crystalline GO nanosheets with a low degree of oxidation (C/O = 3.6–5.3). This simple electrochemical method is extremely useful for preparing large amounts of graphene and GO from small particles of graphite

Preventive effect of statin pretreatment on contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients undergoing coronary angioplasty: Propensity score analysis from a multicenter registry

BackgroundThe prophylactic benefit of statins in reducing the incidence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) has been investigated in several studies with conflicting results. We sought to investigate whether statin pretreatment prevents CI-AKI in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsA total of 2198 CAD patients who underwent PCI, except for those undergoing dialysis or who died within 7 days after angioplasty, were analyzed from the ICAS (Ibaraki Cardiovascular Assessment Study) multicenter registry. Analyzed subjects were divided into 2 groups according to statin pretreatment: statin pretreatment (n = 839) and non-statin pretreatment (n = 1359). Selection bias of statin pretreatment was adjusted by propensity score-matching method: pretreatment statin (n = 565) and non-statin pretreatment (n = 565). CI-AKI was defined as an increase in serum creatinine of ≥ 25% or 0.5 mg/dl from baseline within 1 week of contrast medium exposure.ResultsA total of 192 (8.7%) patients developed CI-AKI. No significant differences were observed in baseline patient characteristics between the statin and non-statin pretreatment groups after propensity score matching. In the propensity score-matched groups, the incidence of CI-AKI was significantly lower in patients with statin pretreatment than in those without statin pretreatment (3.5% vs.10.6%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.18–0.52, P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that statin pretreatment remained an independent negative predictor of CI-AKI (OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.18–0.53, P < 0.001) among propensity score-matched subjects.ConclusionsStatin pretreatment was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of CI-AKI in CAD patients undergoing PCI in the ICAS Registry

Algorithmic Versus Expert Human Interpretation of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Coronary Pressure-Wire Pull Back Data

Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate whether algorithmic interpretation (AI) of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) pressure-wire pull back data would be noninferior to expert human interpretation. Background Interpretation of iFR pressure-wire pull back data can be complex and is subjective. Methods Fifteen human experts interpreted 1,008 iFR pull back traces (691 unique, 317 duplicate). For each trace, experts determined the hemodynamic appropriateness for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and, in such cases, the optimal physiological strategy for PCI. The heart team (HT) interpretation was determined by consensus of the individual expert opinions. The same 1,008 pull back traces were also interpreted algorithmically. The coprimary hypotheses of this study were that AI would be noninferior to the interpretation of the median expert human in determining: 1) the hemodynamic appropriateness for PCI; and 2) the physiological strategy for PCI. Results Regarding the hemodynamic appropriateness for PCI, the median expert human demonstrated 89.3% agreement with the HT in comparison with 89.4% for AI (p < 0.01 for noninferiority). Across the 372 cases judged as hemodynamically appropriate for PCI according to the HT, the median expert human demonstrated 88.8% agreement with the HT in comparison with 89.7% for AI (p < 0.0001 for noninferiority). On reproducibility testing, the HT opinion itself changed 1 in 10 times for both the appropriateness for PCI and the physiological PCI strategy. In contrast, AI showed no change. Conclusions AI of iFR pressure-wire pull back data was noninferior to expert human interpretation in determining both the hemodynamic appropriateness for PCI and the optimal physiological strategy for PCI