Influence of sample surface topography on laser ablation process

In this work we discuss how sample surface topography can significantly influence the laser ablation (LA) process and, in turn, the analytical response of the LA Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) method. Six different surface topographies were prepared on a certified aluminium alloy sample BAM 311 and SRM NIST 610 to investigate the phenomenon. All the samples were repetitively measured by LA-ICP-MS using a spot by spot analysis. The effect of laser fluence in the range of 1–13 J/cm2 was studied. For majority of measured isotopes, the ICP-MS signal was amplified with roughening of the sample surface. A stronger effect was observed on the Al alloy sample, where the more than sixty-time enhancement was achieved in comparison to the polished surface of the sample. Since the effect of surface topography is different for each analyte, it can be stated that surface properties affect not only the ICP-MS response, but also elemental fractionation in LA. The presented results show that different surface topographies may lead to misleading data interpretation because even when applying ablation preshots, the signal of individual elements changes. The utmost care must be taken when preparing the surface for single shot analysis or chemical mapping. On the other hand, by roughening the sample surface, it is possible to significantly increase the sensitivity of the method for individual analytes and supress a matrix effect

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in stable cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=−4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events