S Gordon1, S W Fisher, R H Raymond. 1. Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Imperial College School of Medicine at National Heart and Lung Institute, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laboratory animal allergy is an important occupational disease that is preventable by reduction of exposure to mammalian allergens. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to assess the efficacy of safety equipment in containing mouse urinary protein (MUP)--specifically, individually ventilated cage (IVC) systems and class I--type and class II ventilated cabinets. METHODS: Six IVC systems (which are used to house rodents) were operated at positive and negative pressure. Air samples (2 L/min) were collected at the cage front, cage back, air inlet, and air outlet, and the MUP was quantified by immunoassay. The background MUP of the IVC study room was compared with that of rooms where mice were housed conventionally or in isolators. Class I--type cabinets (n = 2) were tested during the disposal of soiled litter. Air samples were positioned on and behind the operator and inside the cabinet (n = 2). Personal samples were collected while scientific procedures were performed in a class II cabinet and in the open. RESULTS: All of the IVC systems contained MUP effectively (>250-fold) when operated at negative pressure. At positive pressure, the "unsealed" IVC racks leaked MUP (1- to 25-fold reduction) but the "sealed" IVC system did not. Class I--type cabinets reduced (10-fold) but did not eliminate exposure during "cleaning out." No MUP was detected when procedures were performed in class II cabinets (protection factor, >10-fold). CONCLUSION: Safety equipment can substantially reduce exposure to mouse allergen. Allergen exposure in holding rooms will be minimized if mice are housed in IVC systems operated at negative pressure or in "sealed" IVC systems at positive pressure. Respiratory protection should be used whenever "unsealed" IVC systems are operated at positive pressure or during "cleaning out" in class I--type cabinets.
BACKGROUND: Laboratory animal allergy is an important occupational disease that is preventable by reduction of exposure to mammalian allergens. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to assess the efficacy of safety equipment in containing mouse urinary protein (MUP)--specifically, individually ventilated cage (IVC) systems and class I--type and class II ventilated cabinets. METHODS: Six IVC systems (which are used to house rodents) were operated at positive and negative pressure. Air samples (2 L/min) were collected at the cage front, cage back, air inlet, and air outlet, and the MUP was quantified by immunoassay. The background MUP of the IVC study room was compared with that of rooms where mice were housed conventionally or in isolators. Class I--type cabinets (n = 2) were tested during the disposal of soiled litter. Air samples were positioned on and behind the operator and inside the cabinet (n = 2). Personal samples were collected while scientific procedures were performed in a class II cabinet and in the open. RESULTS: All of the IVC systems contained MUP effectively (>250-fold) when operated at negative pressure. At positive pressure, the "unsealed" IVC racks leaked MUP (1- to 25-fold reduction) but the "sealed" IVC system did not. Class I--type cabinets reduced (10-fold) but did not eliminate exposure during "cleaning out." No MUP was detected when procedures were performed in class II cabinets (protection factor, >10-fold). CONCLUSION: Safety equipment can substantially reduce exposure to mouse allergen. Allergen exposure in holding rooms will be minimized if mice are housed in IVC systems operated at negative pressure or in "sealed" IVC systems at positive pressure. Respiratory protection should be used whenever "unsealed" IVC systems are operated at positive pressure or during "cleaning out" in class I--type cabinets.
Authors: Nicole A Monts de Oca; Mitzi Laughlin; John Jenkins; Cynthia R Lockworth; Iris D Bolton; David W Brammer Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 1.232
Authors: Wanda Phipatanakul; Elizabeth Matsui; Jay Portnoy; P Brock Williams; Charles Barnes; Kevin Kennedy; David Bernstein; Joann Blessing-Moore; Linda Cox; David Khan; David Lang; Richard Nicklas; John Oppenheimer; Christopher Randolph; Diane Schuller; Sheldon Spector; Stephen A Tilles; Dana Wallace; James Sublett; Jonathan Bernstein; Carl Grimes; J David Miller; James Seltzer Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 6.347
Authors: Susan Feistenauer; Ingrid Sander; Jörg Schmidt; Eva Zahradnik; Monika Raulf; Markus Brielmeier Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 1.232
Authors: Erica Ferraz; Luisa Karla de Paula Arruda; Ericson Bagatin; Edson Z Martinez; Andrea A Cetlin; Christian S Simoneti; Amanda S Freitas; José A B Martinez; Marcos C Borges; Elcio O Vianna Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 2.365
Authors: Toi A Collins; Amanda E Sparks; Mary M Walker; Lon V Kendall; Karen M Dobos; Valerie K Bergdall; Judy M Hickman-Davis Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 1.706