Synthetic fibers, mainly polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyamide (PA), polyacrylonitrile (PAN) and polypropylene (PP), are the most widely used polymers in the textile industry. These fibers surpass the production of natural fibers with a market share of 54.4%. The advantages of these fibers are their high modulus and strength, stiffness, stretch or elasticity, wrinkle and abrasion resistances, relatively low cost, convenient processing, tailorable performance and easy recycling. The downside to synthetic fibers use are reduced wearing comfort, build-up of electrostatic charge, the tendency to pill, difficulties in finishing, poor soil release properties and low dyeability. These disadvantages are largely associated with their hydrophobic nature. To render their surfaces hydrophilic, various physical, chemical and bulk modification methods are employed to mimic the advantageous properties of their natural counterparts. This review is focused on the application of recent methods for the modification of synthetic textiles using physical methods (corona discharge, plasma, laser, electron beam and neutron irradiations), chemical methods (ozone-gas treatment, supercritical carbon dioxide technique, vapor deposition, surface grafting, enzymatic modification, sol-gel technique, layer-by-layer deposition of nano-materials, micro-encapsulation method and treatment with different reagents) and bulk modification methods by blending polymers with different compounds in extrusion to absorb different colorants. Nowadays, the bulk and surface functionalization of synthetic fibers for various applications is considered as one of the best methods for modern textile finishing processes (Tomasino, 1992). This last stage of textile processing has employed new routes to demonstrate the great potential of nano-science and technology for this industry (Lewin, 2007). Combination of physical technologies and nano-science enhances the durability of textile materials against washing, ultraviolet radiation, friction, abrasion, tension and fading (Kirk–Othmer, 1998). European methods for application of new functional finishing materials must meet high ethical demands for environmental-friendly processing (Fourne, 1999). For this purpose the process of textile finishing is optimized by different researchers in new findings (Elices & Llorca, 2002). Application of inorganic and organic nano-particles have enhanced synthetic fibers attributes, such as softness, durability, breathability, water repellency, fire retardancy and antimicrobial properties (Franz, 2003; McIntyre, 2005; Xanthos, 2005). This review article gives an application overview of various physical and chemical methods of inorganic and organic structured material as potential modifying agents of textiles with emphasis on dyeability enhancements. The composition of synthetic fibers includes polypropylene (PP), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyamides (PA) or polyacrylonitrile (PAN). Synthetic fibers already hold a 54% market share in the fiber market. Of this market share, PET alone accounts for almost 50% of all fiber materials in 2008 (Gubitz & Cavaco-Paulo, 2008). Polypropylene, a major component for the nonwovens market accounts for 10% of the market share of both natural and synthetic fibers worldwide (INDA, 2008 and Aizenshtein, 2008). It is apparent that synthetic polymers have unique properties, such as high uniformity, mechanical strength and resistance to chemicals or abrasion. However, high hydrophobicity, the build-up of static charges, poor breathability, and resistant to finishing are undesirable properties of synthetic materials (Gubitz & Cavaco-Paulo, 2008). Synthetic textile fibers typically undergo a variety of pre-treatments before dyeing and printing is feasible. Compared to their cotton counterparts, fabrics made from synthetic fibers undergo mild scouring before dyeing. Nonetheless, these treatments still create undesirable process conditions wh
MULTIFILE
BACKGROUND: In critical care patients, reaching optimal β-lactam concentrations poses challenges, as infections are caused more often by microorganisms associated with higher MICs, and critically ill patients typically have an unpredictable pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile. Conventional intermittent dosing frequently yields inadequate drug concentrations, while continuous dosing might result in better target attainment. Few studies address cefotaxime concentrations in this population.OBJECTIVES: To assess total and unbound serum levels of cefotaxime and an active metabolite, desacetylcefotaxime, in critically ill patients treated with either continuously or intermittently dosed cefotaxime.METHODS: Adult critical care patients with indication for treatment with cefotaxime were randomized to treatment with either intermittent dosing (1 g every 6 h) or continuous dosing (4 g/24 h, after a loading dose of 1 g). We defined a preset target of reaching and maintaining a total cefotaxime concentration of 4 mg/L from 1 h after start of treatment. CCMO trial registration number NL50809.042.14, Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02560207.RESULTS: Twenty-nine and 30 patients, respectively, were included in the continuous dosing group and the intermittent dosing group. A total of 642 samples were available for analysis. In the continuous dosing arm, 89.3% met our preset target, compared with 50% in the intermittent dosing arm. Patients not reaching this target had a significantly higher creatinine clearance on the day of admission.CONCLUSIONS: These results support the application of a continuous dosing strategy of β-lactams in critical care patients and the practice of therapeutic drug monitoring in a subset of patients with higher renal clearance and need for prolonged treatment for further optimization, where using total cefotaxime concentrations should suffice.
The angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan slows progression of kidney disease in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), yet many patients remain at high risk for progressive kidney function loss. The underlying mechanisms for this response variation might be attributed to differences in angiotensin-1 receptor occupancy (RO), resulting from individual variation in plasma drug exposure, tissue drug exposure, and receptor availability. Therefore, we first assessed the relationship between plasma telmisartan exposure and urinary-albumin-to-creatinine-ratio (UACR) in 10 patients with T2D and albuminuria (mean age 66 years, median UACR 297 mg/g) after 4 weeks treatment with 80 mg telmisartan once daily. Increasing telmisartan exposure associated with a larger reduction in UACR (Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) = −0.64, P = 0.046, median change UACR: −40.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI): −22.9 to −77.4%, mean telmisartan area under the curve (AUC) = 2927.1 ng·hour/mL, 95% CI: 723.0 to 6501.6 ng·hour/mL). Subsequently, we assessed the relation among plasma telmisartan exposure, kidney distribution, and angiotensin-1 RO in five patients with T2D (mean age 60 years, median UACR 72 mg/g) in a separate positron emission tomography imaging study with [11C]Telmisartan. Individual plasma telmisartan exposure correlated with telmisartan distribution to the kidneys (PCC = 0.976, P = 0.024). A meaningful RO could be calculated in three patients receiving 120 mg oral telmisartan, and although high exposure seems related to higher RO, with AUC0–last of 31, 840, and 274 ng·hour/mL and corresponding RO values 5.5%, 44%, and 59%, this was not significant (P = 0.64). Together these results indicate, for the first time, a relationship among interindividual differences in plasma exposure, kidney tissue distribution, RO, and ultimately UACR response after telmisartan administration.
