Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"This book provides an easy-to-read, user-friendly resource for industrial chemists and a text for classroom use, and is an unparalleled tool for understanding and applying the latest information on surfactants. Problems are included at the end of each chapter to enhance the reader's understanding, along with many tables of data that are not compiled elsewhere. Only the minimum mathematics is used in the explanation of topics to make it easy-to-understand and very user friendly\"-- Source other than Library of Congress.

In the era of global industrialisation, the exploration of natural resources has served as a source of experimentation for science and advanced technologies, giving rise to the manufacturing of products with high aggregate value in the world market, such as biosurfactants. Biosurfactants are amphiphilic microbial molecules with hydrophilic and hydrophobic moieties that partition at liquid/liquid, liquid/gas or liquid/solid interfaces. Such characteristics allow these biomolecules to play a key role in emulsification, foam formation, detergency and dispersal, which are desirable qualities in different industries. Biosurfactant production is considered one of the key technologies for development in the 21st century. Besides exerting a strong positive impact on the main global problems, biosurfactant production has considerable importance to the implantation of sustainable industrial processes, such as the use of renewable resources and “green” products. Biodegradability and low toxicity have led to the intensification of scientific studies on a wide range of industrial applications for biosurfactants in the field of bioremediation as well as the petroleum, food processing, health, chemical, agricultural and cosmetic industries. In this paper, we offer an extensive review regarding knowledge accumulated over the years and advances achieved in the incorporation of biomolecules in different industries.

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of photodynamic therapy as an adjunct to conventional endodontic treatment in patients with apical periodontitis and fistulas. In this study, a fistula is characterized as a pathological conduit originating from the infected region at the root apex of the tooth, traversing the oral mucosa, and extending to the external surface of the gingiva. This pathological condition frequently complicates the management of endodontic infections, thereby necessitating the evaluation of supplementary therapeutic interventions. The standard treatment for endodontic infections involves thorough disinfection of the root canal system to remove microbial contamination from the canal and surrounding tissues. To potentially augment the efficacy of conventional treatment, aPDT is proposed as a supplementary, non-invasive technique. This innovative technique uses a photosensitizer, which is a light-sensitive dye, in combination with a light source to produce reactive oxygen species. Reactive oxygen species can effectively target and eliminate bacteria in the root canal system, potentially enhancing treatment outcomes. The study will involve 140 teeth with apical periodontitis and fistulas. The teeth will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. Group I will receive only the conventional endodontic treatment, which includes root canal cleaning, shaping, and obturation. Group II will undergo the same conventional endodontic treatment, but with an additional step of aPDT. The aPDT procedure involves applying a photosensitizer to the root canal and irradiating it with light to produce reactive oxygen species. Each group will consist of 70 teeth to ensure adequate statistical power. The primary outcome is fistula resolution, assessed clinically at 15 and 30 days post-treatment. The secondary outcome is the comparison of apical radiolucency from periapical radiographs to evaluate healing and reduction of periapical pathology. The study aims to determine if adding aPDT significantly improves the management of apical periodontitis and overall success rates of endodontic treatment. The results will provide insights into the effectiveness of aPDT as an adjunctive treatment and its potential benefits in clinical practice.

The ability to manipulate droplets on a substrate using electric signals 1 —known as digital microfluidics—is used in optical 2 , 3 , biomedical 4 , 5 , thermal 6 and electronic 7 applications and has led to commercially available liquid lenses 8 and diagnostics kits 9 , 10 . Such electrical actuation is mainly achieved by electrowetting, with droplets attracted towards and spreading on a conductive substrate in response to an applied voltage. To ensure strong and practical actuation, the substrate is covered with a dielectric layer and a hydrophobic topcoat for electrowetting-on-dielectric (EWOD) 11-13 ; this increases the actuation voltage (to about 100 volts) and can compromise reliability owing to dielectric breakdown 14 , electric charging 15 and biofouling 16 . Here we demonstrate droplet manipulation that uses electrical signals to induce the liquid to dewet, rather than wet, a hydrophilic conductive substrate without the need for added layers. In this electrodewetting mechanism, which is phenomenologically opposite to electrowetting, the liquid–substrate interaction is not controlled directly by electric field but instead by field-induced attachment and detachment of ionic surfactants to the substrate. We show that this actuation mechanism can perform all the basic fluidic operations of digital microfluidics using water on doped silicon wafers in air, with only ±2.5 volts of driving voltage, a few microamperes of current and about 0.015 times the critical micelle concentration of an ionic surfactant. The system can also handle common buffers and organic solvents, promising a simple and reliable microfluidic platform for a broad range of applications. A method of droplet manipulation is described that uses electrical signals to induce the liquid to dewet, rather than wet, a hydrophilic conductive surface.

Objectives SARS-Cov-2 virus preferentially binds to the Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) on alveolar epithelial type II cells, initiating an inflammatory response and tissue damage which may impair surfactant synthesis contributing to alveolar collapse, worsening hypoxia and leading to respiratory failure. The objective of this study is to evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of nebulised surfactant in COVID-19 adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure. Trial design This study is a dose-escalating randomized open-label clinical trial of 20 COVID-19 patients. Participants This study is conducted in two centres: University Hospital Southampton and University College London Hospitals. Eligible participants are aged ≥18, hospitalised with COVID-19 (confirmed by PCR), who require endotracheal intubation and are enrolled within 24 hours of mechanical ventilation. For patients unable to consent, assent is obtained from a personal legal representative (PerLR) or professional legal representative (ProfLR) prior to enrolment. The following are exclusion criteria: imminent expected death within 24 hours; specific contraindications to surfactant administration (e.g. known allergy, pneumothorax, pulmonary hemorrhage); known or suspected pregnancy; stage 4 chronic kidney disease or requiring dialysis (i.e., eGFR < 30); liver failure (Child-Pugh Class C); anticipated transfer to another hospital, which is not a study site, within 72 hours; current or recent (within 1 month) participation in another study that, in the opinion of the investigator, would prevent enrollment for safety reasons; and declined consent or assent. Intervention and comparator Intervention: The study is based on an investigational drug/device combination product. The surfactant product is Bovactant (Alveofact®), a natural animal derived (bovine) lung surfactant formulated as a lyophilized powder in 108 mg vials and reconstituted to 45 mg/mL in buffer supplied in a prefilled syringe. It is isolated by lung lavage and, by weight, is a mixture of: phospholipid (75% phosphatidylcholine, 13% phosphatidylglycerol, 3% phosphatidylethanolamine, 1% phosphatidylinositol and 1% sphingomyelin), 5% cholesterol, 1% lipid-soluble surfactant-associated proteins (SP-B and SP-C), very low levels of free fatty acid, lyso-phosphatidylcholine, water and 0.3% calcium. The Drug Delivery Device is the AeroFact-COVID™ nebulizer, an investigational device based on the Aerogen® Solo vibrating mesh nebulizer. The timing and escalation dosing plans for the surfactant are as follows. Cohort 1: Three patients will receive 10 vials (1080 mg) each of surfactant at dosing times of 0 hours, 8 hours and 24 hours. 2 controls with no placebo intervention. Cohort 2: Three patients will receive 10 vials (1080 mg) of surfactant at dosing times of 0 hours and 8 hours, and 30 vials (3240 mg) at a dosing time of 24 hours. 2 controls with no placebo intervention. Cohort 3 : Three patients will receive 10 vials (1080 mg) of surfactant at a dosing time of 0 hours, and 30 vials (3240 mg) at dosing times of 8 hours and 24 hours. 2 controls with no placebo intervention. Cohort 4: Three patients will receive 30 (3240 mg) vials each of surfactant at dosing times of 0 hours, 8 hours and 24 hours. 2 controls. 2 controls with no placebo intervention. The trial steering committee, advised by the data monitoring committee, will review trial progression and dose escalation/maintenance/reduction after each cohort is completed (48-hour primary outcome timepoint reached) based on available feasibility, adverse event, safety and efficacy data. The trial will not be discontinued on the basis of lack of efficacy. The trial may be stopped early on the basis of safety or feasibility concerns. Comparator: No placebo intervention. All participants will receive usual standard of care in accordance with the local policies for mechanically ventilated patients and all other treatments will be left to the discretion of the attending physician. Main outcomes The co-primary outcome is the improvement in oxygenation (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio) and pulmonary ventilation (Ventilation Index (VI), where VI = [RR x (PIP − PEEP) × PaCO 2 ]/1000) at 48 hours after study initiation. The secondary outcomes include frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs), Adverse Device Effects (ADEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Serious Adverse Device Events (SADEs), change in pulmonary compliance, change in positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) requirement of ventilatory support at 24 and 48 hours after study initiation, clinical improvement defined by time to one improvement point on the ordinal scale described in the WHO master protocol (2020) recorded while hospitalised, days of mechanical ventilation, mechanical ventilator free days (VFD) at day 21, length of intensive care unit stay, number of days hospitalised and mortality at day 28. Exploratory end points will include quantification of SARS-CoV-2 viral load from tracheal aspirates using PCR, surfactant dynamics (synthesis and turnover) and function (surface tension reduction) from deep tracheal aspirate samples (DTAS), surfactant phospholipid concentrations in plasma and DTAS, inflammatory markers (cellular and cytokine) in plasma and DTAS, and blood oxidative stress markers. Randomisation After informed assent, patients fulfilling inclusion criteria will be randomised to 3:2 for the treatment and control arms using an internet-based block randomization service (ALEA tool for clinical trials, FormsVision BV) in combination with electronic data collection. Randomisation will be done by the recruiting centre with a unique subject identifier specific to that centre. Blinding (masking) This is an open-labelled unblinded study. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) The total sample size is 20 COVID-19 mechanically ventilated patients (12 intervention; 8 control). Trial Status Current protocol version is V2 dated 5 th of June 2020. The recruitment is currently ongoing and started on the 14 th of October 2020. The anticipated study completion date is November 2021. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04362059 (Registered 24 April 2020), EUDAMED number: CIV-GB-20-06-033328, EudraCT number: 2020-001886-35 (Registered 11 May 2020) Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1 ). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2 ).

The quest for a chemical surfactant substitute has been fuelled by increased environmental awareness. The benefits that biosurfactants present like biodegradability, and biocompatibility over their chemical and synthetic counterparts has contributed immensely to their popularity and use in various industries such as petrochemicals, mining, metallurgy, agrochemicals, fertilizers, beverages, cosmetics, etc. With the growing demand for biosurfactants, researchers are looking for low-cost waste materials to use them as substrates, which will lower the manufacturing costs while providing waste management services as an add-on benefit. The use of low-cost substrates will significantly reduce the cost of producing biosurfactants. This paper discusses the use of various feedstocks in the production of biosurfactants, which not only reduces the cost of waste treatment but also provides an opportunity to profit from the sale of the biosurfactant. Furthermore, it includes state-of-the-art information about employing municipal solid waste as a sustainable feedstock for biosurfactant production, which has not been simultaneously covered in many published literatures on biosurfactant production from different feedstocks. It also addresses the myriad of other issues associated with the processing of biosurfactants, as well as the methods used to address these issues and perspectives, which will move society towards cleaner production.

Surfactants, also known as surface-active agents, have emerged as an important class of compounds with a wide range of applications. However, the use of chemical-derived surfactants must be restricted due to their potential adverse impact on the ecosystem and the health of human and other living organisms. In the past few years, there has been a growing inclination towards natural-derived alternatives, particularly microbial surfactants, as substitutes for synthetic or chemical-based counterparts. Microbial biosurfactants are abundantly found in bacterial species, predominantly Bacillus spp. and Pseudomonas spp. The chemical structures of biosurfactants involve the complexation of lipids with carbohydrates (glycolipoproteins and glycolipids), peptides (lipopeptides), and phosphates (phospholipids). Lipopeptides, in particular, have been the subject of extensive research due to their versatile properties, including emulsifying, antimicrobial, anticancer, and anti-inflammatory properties. This review provides an update on research progress in the classification of surfactants. Furthermore, it explores various bacterial biosurfactants and their functionalities, along with their advantages over synthetic surfactants. Finally, the potential applications of these biosurfactants in many industries and insights into future research directions are discussed.

Natural surfactants are surface-active molecules synthesized from renewable resources (i.e., plants, animals, or microorganisms) and possess properties comparable to conventional surfactants, making them an environmentally friendly potential alternative to petrochemical surfactants. Additionally, they exhibit biological properties such as anti-microbial properties, biodegradability, and less toxicity, allowing their use in everyday products with minimal risk to human health and the environment. Based on their mode of production, natural surfactants can be classified into first-generation or bio-based surfactants and second-generation or biosurfactants, although their definition may vary depending on the author in the literature. This review offers an extensive classification of bio-based surfactants and biosurfactants, focusing on their composition, natural sources, production methods, and potential applications across various industries. Furthermore, the main challenges and future perspectives are discussed.

Bacillus spp. produce a broad spectrum of lipopeptide biosurfactants, among which surfactin, iturin and fengycin are widely studied families. The goals of this study were to characterize the biosurfactant activity of Bacillus spp. and to investigate their motility and biofilm formation capabilities. In addition, we extracted lipopeptides from these bacteria to assess their antifungal activities and analyzed these products by mass spectrometry (MS). B. amyloliquefaciens FZB42, Bacillus sp. NH 217 and B. subtilis NH-100 exhibited excellent biosurfactant and surface spreading activities, whereas B. atrophaeus 176s and Paenibacillus polymyxa C1225 showed moderate activity, and B. subtilis 168 showed no activity. Strains FZB42, NH-100, NH-217, 176s and CC125 exhibited excellent biofilm formation capabilities. Lipopeptide extracts displayed good antifungal activity against various phytopathogens and their associated diseases, such as Fusarium moniliforme (rice bakanae disease), Fusarium oxysporum (root rot), Fusarium solani (root rot) and Trichoderma atroviride (ear rot and root rot). Lipopeptide extracts of these strains also showed hemolytic activity, demonstrating their strong potential to produce surfactants. LCMS-ESI analyses identified the presence of surfactin, iturin and fengycin in the extracts of Bacillus strains. Thus, the strains assayed in this study show potential as biocontrol agents against various Fusarium and Trichoderma species.

The global bio-based chemical market is growing in size and importance. Bio-based solvents such as glycerol and 2-methyltetrahydrofuran are often discussed as important introductions to the conventional repertoire of solvents. However adoption of new innovations by industry is typically slow. Therefore it might be anticipated that neoteric solvent systems (e.g., ionic liquids) will remain niche, while renewable routes to historically established solvents will continue to grow in importance. This review discusses bio-based solvents from the perspective of their production, identifying suitable feedstocks, platform molecules, and relevant product streams for the sustainable manufacturing of conventional solvents.