Literature DB >> 12500806

The biokinetics of uranium migrating from embedded DU fragments.

R W Leggett1, T C Pellmar.   

Abstract

Military uses of depleted uranium (DU) munitions have resulted in casualties with embedded DU fragments. Assessment of radiological or chemical health risks from these fragments requires a model relating urinary U to the rate of migration of U from the fragments, and its accumulation in systemic tissues. A detailed biokinetic model for U has been published by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), but its applicability to U migrating from embedded DU fragments is uncertain. Recently, Pellmar and colleagues (1999) conducted a study at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute (AFRRI) on the redistribution and toxicology of U in rats with implanted DU pellets, simulating embedded fragments. This paper compares the biokinetic data from that study with the behavior of commonly studied forms of U in rats (e.g., intravenously injected U nitrate). The comparisons indicate that the biokinetics of U migrating from embedded DU is similar to that of commonly studied forms of U with regard to long-term accumulation in kidneys, bone, and liver. The results provide limited support for the application of the ICRP's model to persons with embedded DU fragments. Additional information is needed with regard to the short-term behavior of migrating U and its accumulation in lymph nodes, brain, testicles, and other infrequently studied U repositories.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12500806     DOI: 10.1016/s0265-931x(02)00050-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Radioact        ISSN: 0265-931X            Impact factor:   2.674


  8 in total

1.  Depleted uranium exposure and health effects in Gulf War veterans.

Authors:  Katherine S Squibb; Melissa A McDiarmid
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-04-29       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Incorporation of uranium into a biomimetic apatite: physicochemical and biological aspects.

Authors:  Grégory Chatelain; Damien Bourgeois; Johann Ravaux; Olivier Averseng; Claude Vidaud; Daniel Meyer
Journal:  J Biol Inorg Chem       Date:  2014-12-23       Impact factor: 3.358

3.  Toxicity of high uranium doses in broilers and protection with mineral adsorbents.

Authors:  Branislava Mitrović; Mirjana Stojanović; Živko Sekulić; Velibor Andrić; Mihajlo Vićentijević; Borjana Vranješ
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2019-04-10       Impact factor: 1.925

4.  Hypertension and hematologic parameters in a community near a uranium processing facility.

Authors:  Sara E Wagner; James B Burch; Matteo Bottai; Susan M Pinney; Robin Puett; Dwayne Porter; John E Vena; James R Hébert
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 6.498

5.  Synergistic cytotoxicity and DNA strand breaks in cells and plasmid DNA exposed to uranyl acetate and ultraviolet radiation.

Authors:  Janice Wilson; Mary C Zuniga; Filbert Yazzie; Diane M Stearns
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 3.446

6.  Bone as a possible target of chemical toxicity of natural uranium in drinking water.

Authors:  Päivi Kurttio; Hannu Komulainen; Aila Leino; Laina Salonen; Anssi Auvinen; Heikki Saha
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 9.031

7.  Effects of a Modified Chitosan Compound Combined with Lung Lavage after Inhalation of Depleted Uranium Dust.

Authors:  Yao Xiao; Feng Zeng; Weilin Fu; Yi Zhang; Xiangyu Chen; Yi Liang; Rong Li; Minghua Liu
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 2.922

Review 8.  Review of Knowledge of Uranium-Induced Kidney Toxicity for the Development of an Adverse Outcome Pathway to Renal Impairment.

Authors:  Yann Guéguen; Marie Frerejacques
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-04-15       Impact factor: 6.208

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.