2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2019.05.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Treatment of anticancer drugs in hospital and wastewater effluents using nanofiltration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
1
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on previously optimized conditions, the pilot unit was operated at a controlled pressure difference of 6 bar and an average recovery rate of 70% [ 26 ]. During the 24 h of in situ experiments, the permeance did not change much with an average normalized value (20 °C) of 2.8 L·h −1 ·m −2 ·bar −1 and a coefficient of variation of 6.3%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Based on previously optimized conditions, the pilot unit was operated at a controlled pressure difference of 6 bar and an average recovery rate of 70% [ 26 ]. During the 24 h of in situ experiments, the permeance did not change much with an average normalized value (20 °C) of 2.8 L·h −1 ·m −2 ·bar −1 and a coefficient of variation of 6.3%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The operation of the pilot unit has been optimized in a previous study conducted with the same effluent and several assays were conducted under controlled permeate flux (12.7 L·m −2 ·h −1 , 15.2·L·m −2 ·h −1 , 19.0 L·m −2 ·h −1 and 25.3 L·m −2 ·h −1 ) or controlled transmembrane pressure conditions (5 bar and 6 bar) and different recovery rates (feed flow of water converted into treated flow of water (permeate); approximately 20%, 30%, 40%, 70% and 80%) to determine the operating conditions that would minimize fouling resistance, would maximize the production of treated water and rejection of anticancer compounds [ 26 ]. The best operating conditions for this wastewater effluent were found at a controlled pressure difference of 6 bar and using a recovery rate of approximately 70%.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An inherent consequence of the increase in cancer incidence is the constant search for new, effective solutions, the increase in the consumption of anticancer drugs (ADs) [ 3 , 5 ], and the risk of introducing more of these substances into natural ecosystems. These drugs, due to their non-specific mode of action, as well as mutagenic, carcinogenic, cyto- and genotoxic properties, disrupting the functioning of the endocrine system in eukaryotic cells, should be given greater and special attention because information on their potential risk to both humans and the environment is still limited [ 3 , 6 , 7 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, the available data is quite diversified in the terms of the threat and risk they might pose. On one hand, their concentrations in hospital effluents (up to hundreds μg L −1 (Cristóvão et al 2019;Santana-Viera et al 2020)) are alarmingly high as well as their presence in wastewater effluents (Hilton and Thomas 2003;Olalla et al 2018;Santana-Viera et al 2019) is concerning. On the other hand, the concentrations in natural waters are on the level of ng L −1 (Azuma 2018;Ferrando-Climent et al 2014;Kosjek and Heath 2011), if the anticancer drugs are detected at all (Santos et al 2018;Ternes 1998).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%