Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 16:1–13. Online ahead of print. doi: 10.1007/s13399-021-01946-4

Table 5.

Comparison of maximum uremic toxin removal capacity of the various adsorbents

Adsorbent Maximum adsorption capacity (mg/g) References
Creatinine Uric acid
RAC 430 504 In this work
Spherical activated carbon 18.4 24.3 [47]
Highly mesoporous activated carbons 68.6 - [38]
Active carbons with nitric acid hydrothermal Modification 62.5 - [15]
Spherical activated carbon 18 20 [39]
polyaniline‑poly (styrene sulfonate) hydrogels based Activated carbon particle 341.2 - [40]
Zinc oxide nanoparticles loaded on activated carbon - 345.8 [51]
Pitch-based spherical activated - 333.1 [52]
Carbon nanotubes 47.2 - [50]
Polymeric microsphere 25 - [53]
Three-component dual-layer hollow fiber membrane 86.2 29.3 [49]
Porous polyethersulfone mixed-matrix membranes 133.3 - [54]
Electrospun polyethersulfone/polyvinylpyrrolidone-zeolite core–shell 4.8 - [36]
Dealuminated zeolites 70 - [55]
Zeolite-polymer composite nanofibers 92 - [56]
Mordenite 22 - [57]
Graphene oxide 4.1 - [58]
Magnetic graphene oxide 46.21 [59]
Cellulose dinitrobenzoate 3.9 - [60]
Cellulose nitrate derivatives 2.1 - [61]
Ti3C2Tx MXene 45.7 17 [44]
Zn1-xMgxFe2O4 77 21 [48]
PEI/SiO2 - 84.9 [62]