Trace Sulfur Accelerated Peroxydisulfate Activation Based on a ZIF-67-Derived Nanostructure for Carbamazepine Degradation

Sulfate-radical-based wastewater treatment has received great interest due to its high-level efficiency. However, the preparation of stable and recyclable nanocatalysts remains a challenge. Herein, a highly efficient catalyst (FeCo/SC) for persulfate activation is successfully synthesized via dispersing S and Fe into carbon skeletons derived from ZIF-67. After the introduction of S, FeCo/SC exhibited excellent catalytic performance. With the action of SO4–•, Fe(VI), and 1O2, the degradation efficiency of carbamazepine (CBZ) (10 mg L–1) could be up to 97.9 ± 2% within 10 min. The results showed that the larger surface area after S doping decreases the electron transfer resistance. The S0/S2– is beneficial for promoting the Fe(III)-to-Fe(II) and Co(III)-to-Co(II) conversion cycle. Moreover, the liquid chromatograph-mass spectrometer (LC-MS), density functional theory (DFT), and ecological structure–activity relationships (ECOSAR) revealed the possible degradation pathway of CBZ, which was a toxicity attenuation process. In consequence, this work offers an innovative scheme for researching the effect of trace S-doped bimetallic oxide nanoparticles on PDS heterogeneous catalytic systems

Table1_Long-term outcomes of radiofrequency ablation vs. partial nephrectomy for cT1 renal cancer: A meta-analysis and systematic review.xlsx

BackgroundPartial nephrectomy (PN) is one of the most preferred nephron-sparing treatments for clinical T1 (cT1) renal cancer, while radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is usually used for patients who are poor surgical candidates. The long-term oncologic outcome of RFA vs. PN for cT1 renal cancer remains undetermined. This meta-analysis aims to compare the treatment efficacy and safety of RFA and PN for patients with cT1 renal cancer with long-term follow-up of at least 5 years.MethodThis meta-analysis was performed following the PRISMA reporting guidelines. Literature studies that had data on the comparison of the efficacy or safety of RFA vs. PN in treating cT1 renal cancer were searched in databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from 1 January2000 to 1 May 2022. Only long-term studies with a median or mean follow-up of at least 5 years were included. The following measures of effect were pooled: odds ratio (OR) for recurrence and major complications; hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). Additional analyses, including sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and publication bias analysis, were also performed.ResultsA total of seven studies with 1,635 patients were finally included. The treatment efficacy of RFA was not different with PN in terms of cancer recurrence (OR = 1.22, 95% CI, 0.45–3.28), PFS (HR = 1.26, 95% CI, 0.75–2.11), and CSS (HR = 1.27, 95% CI, 0.41–3.95) as well as major complications (OR = 1.31, 95% CI, 0.55–3.14) (P > 0.05 for all). RFA was a potential significant risk factor for OS (HR = 1.76, 95% CI, 1.32–2.34, P ConclusionThis is the first meta-analysis that focuses on the long-term oncological outcomes of cT1 renal cancer, and the results suggest that RFA has comparable therapeutic efficacy with PN. RFA is a nephron-sparing technique with favorable oncologic efficacy and safety and a good treatment alternative for cT1 renal cancer.</p