Comparing Inhaled Ultrafine versus Fine Zinc Oxide Particles in Healthy Adults: A Human Inhalation Study
Zinc oxide is a common, biologically active constituent of particulate air pollution as well as a workplace toxin. Ultrafine particles (< 0.1 microm diameter) are believed to be more potent than an equal mass of inhaled accumulation mode particles (0.1-1.0 microm diameter). We compared exposure-r...
Saved in:
Published in | American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine Vol. 171; no. 10; pp. 1129 - 1135 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
New York, NY
Am Thoracic Soc
15.05.2005
American Lung Association American Thoracic Society |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 1073-449X 1535-4970 |
DOI | 10.1164/rccm.200406-837OC |
Cover
Summary: | Zinc oxide is a common, biologically active constituent of particulate air pollution as well as a workplace toxin. Ultrafine particles (< 0.1 microm diameter) are believed to be more potent than an equal mass of inhaled accumulation mode particles (0.1-1.0 microm diameter).
We compared exposure-response relationships for respiratory, hematologic, and cardiovascular endpoints between ultrafine and accumulation mode zinc oxide particles.
In a human inhalation study, 12 healthy adults inhaled 500 microg/m3 of ultrafine zinc oxide, the same mass of fine zinc oxide, and filtered air while at rest for 2 hours.
Preexposure and follow-up studies of symptoms, leukocyte surface markers, hemostasis, and cardiac electrophysiology were conducted to 24 hours post-exposure. Induced sputum was sampled 24 hours after exposure. No differences were detected between any of the three exposure conditions at this level of exposure.
Freshly generated zinc oxide in the fine or ultrafine fractions inhaled by healthy subjects at rest at a concentration of 500 microg/m3 for 2 hours is below the threshold for acute systemic effects as detected by these endpoints. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 content type line 23 Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to William S. Beckett, M.D., University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box EHSC, Rochester, NY 14642. E-mail: bill_beckett@urmc.rochester.edu Conflict of Interest Statement: W.S.B. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; D.F.C. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; A.P.-B. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; D.M.S. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; J.C.S. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; M.W.F. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; M.J.U. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; L.-S.H. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; C.C. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; W.Z. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript; G.O. does not have a financial relationship with a commercial entity that has an interest in the subject of this manuscript. Supported by grants HL65208-03, EPA R-827354, P30 ES01247, and a General Clinical Research Center grant 5 M01 RR00044 from the National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health. |
ISSN: | 1073-449X 1535-4970 |
DOI: | 10.1164/rccm.200406-837OC |