Terminal Phosphanido Rhodium Complexes Mediating Catalytic P—P and P—C Bond Formation

Complexes with terminal phosphanido (M-PR2) functionalities are believed to be crucial intermediates in new catalytic processes involving the formation of P-P and P-C bonds. We showcase here the isolation and characterization of mononuclear phosphanide rhodium complexes ([RhTp(H)(PR2)L]) that result from the oxidative addition of secondary phosphanes, a reaction that was also explored computationally. These compounds are active catalysts for the dehydrocoupling of PHPh2 to Ph2P-PPh2. The hydrophosphination of dimethyl maleate and the unactivated olefin ethylene is also reported. Reliable evidence for the prominent role of mononuclear phosphanido rhodium species in these reactions is also provided.The generous financial support from MICINN/FEDER (Project CTQ2011-22516), Gobierno de Aragón/FSE (GA/FSE, Inorganic Molecular Architecture Group, E70), and NWO-CW (VICI project 016.122.613; BdB) is gratefully acknowledged. A.M.G. and A.L.S. thank Gobierno de Aragón and MEC, respectively, for fellowships.Peer reviewe

Nucleophilicity and P-C bond formation reactions of a terminal phosphanido iridium complex

The diiridium complex [{Ir(ABPN(2))(CO)}(2)(μ-CO)] (1; [ABPN(2)]- = [(allyl)B(Pz)(2)(CH(2)PPh(2))]-) reacts with diphenylphosphane affording [Ir(ABPN(2))(CO)(H) (PPh(2))] (2), the product of the oxidative addition of the P-H bond to the metal. DFT studies revealed a large contribution of the terminal phosphanido lone pair to the HOMO of 2, indicating nucleophilic character of this ligand, which is evidenced by reactions of 2 with typical electrophiles such as H+, Me+, and O(2). Products from the reaction of 2 with methyl chloroacetate were found to be either [Ir(ABPN(2))(CO)(H)(PPh(2)CH(2)CO(2)Me)][PF(6)] ([6]PF(6)) or [Ir(ABPN(2))(CO)(Cl)(H)] (7) and the free phosphane (PPh(2)CH(2)CO(2)Me), both involving PC bond formation, depending on the reaction conditions. New complexes having iridacyclophosphapentenone and iridacyclophosphapentanone moieties result from reactions of 2 with dimethyl acetylenedicarboxylate and dimethyl maleate, respectively, as a consequence of a further incorporation of the carbonyl ligand. In this line, the terminal alkyne methyl propiolate gave a mixture of a similar iridacyclophosphapentanone complex and [Ir(ABPN(2)){CH-C(CO(2)Me)-CO}{PPh(2)CH-CH(CO(2)Me)}] (10), which bears the functionalized phosphane PPh(2)CH-CH(CO(2)Me) and an iridacyclobutenone fragment. Related model reactions aimed to confirm mechanistic proposals are also studied

Prevalencia de infección por coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes y profesionales de un hospital de media y larga estancia en España

Background and goals: The aim of the study is to know the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients and professional staff of a medium or long-stay hospital during the peak period of the pandemic in Spain, spring 2020. Material and methods: At the end of February 2020, we developed at the hospital a strategy to diagnose the SARS-CoV-2 infection consisting of complementing the realization of PCR tests at real time with a quick technique of lateral flow immunochromatography to detect IgG and IgM antibodies against the virus. We also developed a protocol to realize those diagnostic tests and considered an infection (current or past) a positive result in any of the above tests. We included 524 participants in the study (230 patients and 294 hospital staff), and divided them into hospital patients and Hemodialysis outpatients. Furthermore, we divided the hospital staff into healthcare and non-healthcare staff. The documented period was from March, 20th to April, 21st, 2020. Results: 26 out of 230 patients tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques (PCR, antibodies IgG, IgM) with a 11.30% prevalence. According to patients groups, we got a 14.38% prevalence in hospital patients vs. 5.95% in outpatients, with a significantly higher risk in admitted patients after adjustment for age and gender (OR=3, 309, 95%CI: 1, 154-9, 495). 24 out of 294 hospital staff tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques, with a 8.16% prevalence. According to the groups, we got a 8.91% prevalence in healthcare staff vs. 4.26% in non-healthcare staff. Thus, we do not see any statistically significant differences between hospital staff and patients as far as prevalence is concerned (P=0, 391), (OR=2, 200, 95%CI: 0, 500-9, 689). Conclusions: The result of the study was a quite low prevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in both patients and hospital staff, being the hospital patients’ prevalence rate higher than the outpatients’, and the healthcare staff higher than the non-healthcare''s. Combining PCR tests (gold standard) with antibodies tests proved useful as a diagnostic strategy