University of Madras

About: University of Madras is a education organization based out in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Ring (chemistry) & Lipid peroxidation. The organization has 8496 authors who have published 11369 publications receiving 211152 citations. The organization is also known as: Madras University & University of Chennai.

Formation of zinc phosphate coating by anodic electrochemical treatment

Abstract: The formation of zinc phosphate coating by anodic electrochemical treatment is addressed. The importance of the addition of nitrite, the extent of sludge formation and the eco-friendliness of the process is presented. Based on the amount of coating weight and change in potential–time measurements, a mechanism for the coating formation is proposed. The coating characteristics and corrosion resistance were evaluated. The study reveals that anodic electrochemical treatment, though enabling an acceleration of coating deposition, results in heavy sludge formation, making the process less eco-friendly. The coatings obtained by anodic phosphating are rich in phosphophyllite phase with a smaller proportion of hopeite phase and iron phosphate. Since the porosity of the anodically phosphated mild steel substrate is relatively higher, these coatings will suit applications which require higher oil-retaining capacity. The corrosion behaviour of anodically phosphated mild steel substrate in 3.5% sodium chloride solution reveals the ability of the phosphate coating to act as a barrier film towards the ingress of corrosive media.

Characterization of HIV-HBV coinfection in a multinational HIV-infected cohort.

Abstract: Objective: To understand the HIV–hepatitis B virus (HBV) epidemic from a global perspective by clinically and virologically characterizing these viruses at the time of antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation in a multinational cohort. Methods and design: HIV-infected patients enrolled in two international studies were classified as HIV–HBV coinfected or HIV monoinfected prior to ART. HIV–HBV coinfected patients were tested for HBV characteristics, hepatitis D virus (HDV), a novel noninvasive marker of liver disease, and drug-resistant HBV. Comparisons between discrete covariates used x 2 or Fisher’s exact tests (and Jonchkheere–Terpstra for trend tests), whereas continuous covariates were compared using Wilcoxon RankSum Test. Results: Of the 2105 HIV-infected patients from 11 countries, the median age was 34 years and 63% were black. The 115 HIV–HBV coinfected patients had significantly higher alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase values, lower BMI, and lower CD4 þ T-cell counts than HIV monoinfected patients (median 159 and 137 cells/ml, respectively, P ¼ 0.04). In the coinfected patients, 49.6% had HBeAgnegative HBV, 60.2% had genotype A HBV, and 13% were HDV positive. Of the HBeAg-negative patients, 66% had HBV DNA 2000 IU/ml or less compared to 5.2% of the HBeAg-positive individuals. Drug-resistant HBV was not detected. Conclusion: Screening for HBV in HIV-infected patients in resource-limited settings is important because it is associated with lower CD4 þ T-cell counts. In settings in which HBV DNA is not available, HBeAg may be useful to assess the need for HBV treatment. Screening for drug-resistant HBV is not needed prior to starting ART in settings in which this study was conducted. 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins AIDS 2013, 27:191–201