Takako Oyabu1,2, Yasuo Morimoto3, Hiroto Izumi3, Yukiko Yoshiura3, Taisuke Tomonaga3, Byeong-Woo Lee3, Takami Okada3, Toshihiko Myojo3, Manabu Shimada4, Masaru Kubo4, Kazuhiro Yamamoto5, Kenji Kawaguchi5, Takeshi Sasaki5. 1. University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan, Kitakyushu, Japan. toyabu@med.uoeh-u.ac.jp. 2. Department of Environmental Health Engineering, Institute of Industrial Ecological Sciences, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan, 1-1 Iseigaoka, Yahatanishi, Kitakyushu, 807-8555, Japan. toyabu@med.uoeh-u.ac.jp. 3. University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan, Kitakyushu, Japan. 4. Graduate School of Engineering, Hiroshima University, Higashi-Hiroshima, Japan. 5. National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Tsukuba, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We performed the two inhalation exposures, whole-body inhalation and nose-only inhalation, to investigate the pulmonary deposition and health effects of the two inhalation methods. METHODS: In both methods, we exposed rats to the same TiO2 nanoparticles at almost the same exposure concentration for 6 h and compared the deposited amounts of nanoparticles and histopathological changes in the lungs. Rats were exposed to rutile-type TiO2 nanoparticles generated by the spray-dry method for 6 h. The exposure concentration in the whole-body chamber was 4.10 ± 1.07 mg/m(3), and that in nose-only chamber was 4.01 ± 1.11 mg/m(3). The particle sizes were 230 and 180 nm, respectively. A control group was exposed to fresh air. RESULTS: The amounts of TiO2 deposited in the lungs as measured by ICP-AES after acid digestion just after the exposure were: 42.6 ± 3.5 μg in the whole-body exposure and 46.0 ± 7.7 μg in the nose-only exposure groups. The histopathological evaluation was the same in both exposure groups: no infiltration of inflammatory cells in the alveolar space and interstitium, and no fibrosis. CONCLUSION: The two inhalation methods using the same material under the same exposure conditions resulted in the same particle deposition and histopathology in the lung.
OBJECTIVES: We performed the two inhalation exposures, whole-body inhalation and nose-only inhalation, to investigate the pulmonary deposition and health effects of the two inhalation methods. METHODS: In both methods, we exposed rats to the same TiO2 nanoparticles at almost the same exposure concentration for 6 h and compared the deposited amounts of nanoparticles and histopathological changes in the lungs. Rats were exposed to rutile-type TiO2 nanoparticles generated by the spray-dry method for 6 h. The exposure concentration in the whole-body chamber was 4.10 ± 1.07 mg/m(3), and that in nose-only chamber was 4.01 ± 1.11 mg/m(3). The particle sizes were 230 and 180 nm, respectively. A control group was exposed to fresh air. RESULTS: The amounts of TiO2 deposited in the lungs as measured by ICP-AES after acid digestion just after the exposure were: 42.6 ± 3.5 μg in the whole-body exposure and 46.0 ± 7.7 μg in the nose-only exposure groups. The histopathological evaluation was the same in both exposure groups: no infiltration of inflammatory cells in the alveolar space and interstitium, and no fibrosis. CONCLUSION: The two inhalation methods using the same material under the same exposure conditions resulted in the same particle deposition and histopathology in the lung.
Authors: C J Johnston; K E Driscoll; J N Finkelstein; R Baggs; M A O'Reilly; J Carter; R Gelein; G Oberdörster Journal: Toxicol Sci Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Timothy N Perkins; Arti Shukla; Paul M Peeters; Jeremy L Steinbacher; Christopher C Landry; Sherrill A Lathrop; Chad Steele; Niki L Reynaert; Emiel F M Wouters; Brooke T Mossman Journal: Part Fibre Toxicol Date: 2012-02-02 Impact factor: 9.400
Authors: Alexandra Noël; Christina M Verret; Farhana Hasan; Slawomir Lomnicki; John Morse; Annette Robichaud; Arthur L Penn Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2018-08-25 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Sergei S Biryukov; Christopher K Cote; Christopher P Klimko; Jennifer L Dankmeyer; Nathaniel O Rill; Jennifer L Shoe; Melissa Hunter; Zain Shamsuddin; Ivan Velez; Zander M Hedrick; Raysa Rosario-Acevedo; Yuli Talyansky; Lindsey K Schmidt; Caitlyn E Orne; David P Fetterer; Mary N Burtnick; Paul J Brett; Susan L Welkos; David DeShazer Journal: Front Microbiol Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 6.064
Authors: Ulrike Kogel; Ee Tsin Wong; Justyna Szostak; Wei Teck Tan; Francesco Lucci; Patrice Leroy; Bjoern Titz; Yang Xiang; Tiffany Low; Sin Kei Wong; Emmanuel Guedj; Nikolai V Ivanov; Walter K Schlage; Manuel C Peitsch; Arkadiusz Kuczaj; Patrick Vanscheeuwijck; Julia Hoeng Journal: J Appl Toxicol Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 3.446