http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Controlling Size and Distribution for Nano-sized Polystyrene Spheres
Yun, Dong-Shin,Lee, Hyeong-Seok,Jang, Ho-Gyeom,Yoo, Jung-Whan Korean Chemical Society 2010 Bulletin of the Korean Chemical Society Vol.31 No.5
Highly monodisperse polystyrene (PS) nanospheres were fabricated by surfactant-free emulsion polymerization in water using styrene, 2,2'-azobis(2-methyl propionamidine) dihydrochloride (AIBA), and poly(vinyl pyrrolidone) (PVP). The size and distribution of the PS nanospheres were systematically investigated in terms of initiator concentration, stabilizer concentration, reaction temperature, reaction time, and reactant concentration. With increasing AIBA initiator concentration, PS particle sizes are raised proportionally, and can be controlled from 120 to 380 nm. Particle sizes were reduced with increasing PVP concentration. This decrease occurs because a high PVP concentration leads to a large number of primary nuclei in the early stage of polymerization. When the reaction temperature increased, the sizes of the PS particles decrease slightly. The particles grew quickly during the initial reaction stage (1-3 h) and the growth rate became steady-state after 6 h. The PS sizes approximately doubled when the reactant (styrene, PVP, azo-initiator) concentrations were increased by a factor of eight.
Yun Sojeong,Ryu Ji Hyeong,Jang Joo Hee,Bae Hyunjoo,Yoo Seung-Hyo,Choi Ae-Ran,Jo Sung Jin,Lim Jihyang,Lee Jehoon,Ryu Hyejin,Cho Sung-Yeon,Lee Dong-Gun,Lee Jongmin,Kim Seok Chan,Park Yeon-Joon,Lee Hyeyo 대한진단검사의학회 2021 Annals of Laboratory Medicine Vol.41 No.6
Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody assays have high clinical utility in managing the pandemic. We compared antibody responses and seroconversion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients using different immunoassays. Methods: We evaluated 12 commercial immunoassays, including three automated chemiluminescent immunoassays (Abbott, Roche, and Siemens), three enzyme immunoassays (Bio-Rad, Euroimmun, and Vircell), five lateral flow immunoassays (Boditech Med, SD biosensor, PCL, Sugentech, and Rapigen), and one surrogate neutralizing antibody assay (GenScript) in sequential samples from 49 COVID-19 patients and 10 seroconversion panels. Results: The positive percent agreement (PPA) of assays for a COVID-19 diagnosis ranged from 84.0% to 98.5% for all samples (>14 days after symptom onset), with IgM or IgA assays showing higher PPAs. Seroconversion responses varied across the assay type and disease severity. Assays targeting the spike or receptor-binding domain protein showed a tendency for early seroconversion detection and higher index values in patients with severe disease. Index values from SARS-CoV-2 binding antibody assays (three automated assays, one LFIA, and three EIAs) showed moderate to strong correlations with the neutralizing antibody percentage (r=0.517–0.874), and stronger correlations in patients with severe disease and in assays targeting spike protein. Agreement among the 12 assays was good (74.3%–96.4%) for detecting IgG or total antibodies. Conclusions: Positivity rates and seroconversion of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies vary depending on the assay kits, disease severity, and antigen target. This study contributes to a better understanding of antibody response in symptomatic COVID-19 patients using currently available assays.