| Literature DB >> 33948695 |
Elvira Maria Bauer1, Daniele Cecchetti2, Ettore Guerriero3, Steven Nisticò4, Giulia Germinario5, Simona Sennato6, Lorenzo Gontrani7, Pietro Tagliatesta2, Marilena Carbone8.
Abstract
Comparative laser and thermal treatments were carried out on PG36, a green phthalocyanine-based pigment, permitted in European countries where legislation on tattoo composition was issued. Prior to the treatments, PG36 was characterized by SEM imaging, EDX, IR and UV-Vis spectroscopies, revealing an excess of Si and C and O as compared to the pure halogenated Cu-phthalocyanine. Laser treatments were carried out with a Nd:YAG device applied to H2O and propan-2-ol dispersions. Pyrolysis and calcinations were carried out in air or under N2 flow. The outcome of the different procedures was analyzed by UV-Vis spectroscopy, GC-mass spectrometry, X-ray diffraction of the solid residues, SEM microscopy and dynamic light scattering. The comparative analysis indicated the production of different fragment compounds depending on the treatment, (pyrolysis or laser), and, to some extent, to the solvent of the dispersion, with pyrolysis generating a larger number of hazardous compounds. Hydrocarbons and cyclic siloxanes present as additives in PG36 were stable or degraded depending on the treatment. The morphology of the products is also treatment-dependent with nanoparticles < 20 nm and fibers being produced upon laser treatments only. Based on the experimental findings, the equivalence of laser and thermal treatments is evaluated.Entities:
Keywords: Additives; Harmful morphology; Nd:YAG laser; PG36; Pyrolysis; Solid residues; Toxic fragments
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33948695 PMCID: PMC8241676 DOI: 10.1007/s00204-021-03052-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Toxicol ISSN: 0340-5761 Impact factor: 5.153
Summary of the conditions used for PG36 laser and thermal treatments, and corresponding samples naming
| Sample | Treatment | Solvent/carrier | Fluence (J/cm2) | Spot size (mm) | Temp (°C) | Time (min) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P2OL15 | Nd:YAG | Propan-2-ol | 3.5 | 4 | 15 | |
| P2OL44 | Nd:YAG | Propan-2-ol | 3.5 | 4 | 44 | |
| H2O15 | Nd:YAG | H2O | 3.5 | 4 | 15 | |
| H2O44 | Nd:YAG | H2O | 3.5 | 4 | 44 | |
| Py700 | Pyrolysis | He | 700 | |||
| Py800 | Pyrolysis | He | 800 | |||
| CA800 | Calcination | Air | 800 | 180 | ||
| CN800R | Calcination | N2 | 800 | 180 | ||
| CN800B | Calcination | N2 | 800 | 180 |
CN800R and CN800B were obtained upon the same calcination procedure, followed by coarse manual separation, based on the color
Fig. 1a SEM image of PG36. The blue and yellow lines are examples of parallel and nearly perpendicular macro-arrangements of the aggregates. b EDX analysis after deposition on carbon tape, hence excluding Si contribution from the sample holder (color figure online)
Fig. 2UV–Vis spectra of PG36 treated with Nd:YAG laser operated at 532 nm, at different irradiation times, a dispersed in water and b dispersed in propan-2-ol. The spectra are compared to the untreated dispersions (T = 0) (color figure online)
EDX elemental analysis of PG36 deposited on carbon tape (C-SH) or Si (Si-SH) sample holders
| Element | PG36 atomic % C-SH | PG36 atomic % C-SH norm | PG36 atomic % Si-SH |
|---|---|---|---|
| C | 71.7 + 17.04 | 88.58 | 83.3 |
| N | 2.01 | 2.1 | 2.5 |
| O | 2.39 | 2.39 | 7.7 |
| Br | 3.99 | 4.01 | 4.8 |
| Cl | 1.24 | 1.27 | 1.4 |
| Cu | 0.23 | 0.25 | 0.3 |
| Si | 1.40 | 1.4 |
The atomic %s are normalyzed for the contribution of the sample holder, i.e., the atomic % of Si or Si + F (PG36)
Average hydrodynamic diameter 2RH from DLS measurements on PG36 in H2O (PG36/H2O), and PG36 in propan-2-ol (PG36/P2OL), determined by cumulant analysis and intensity-weighted size distribution by NNLS algorithm
| Sample | 2 | PDI (cumulant) | 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| PG36/H2O | 98 ± 1.2 | 0.259 ± 0.012 | 131 ± 4.2 |
| PG36/P2OL | 126 ± 1.6 | 0.265 ± 0.025 | 155 ± 3.2 |
Data refer to average value and standard deviation over three repeated measurements
Fragment compounds produced upon pyrolysis and laser treatments along with the corresponding hazard codes and categories
The retention times (RT) are marked lilac for fragments due to pyrolysis, black for laser. Halogenated fragment compounds are reported green, siloxane blue and hydrocarbon black. The hazard codes are labeled H followed by a three digits number, the category is indicated as C. followed by a number ranging from 1 (highest risk) to 4 (lower risk). The slash “/” indicates that hazard data are not available for the corresponding compound. Finally, siloxanes are indicated by the labels D (cyclic siloxanes) followed by a number corresponding to silicon atoms in the structure. The complete formulas are Hexamethyl cyclotrisiloxane (D3), Octamethyl cyclotetrasiloxane (D4), Decamethyl cyclopentasiloxane (D5), Dodecamethyl cyclohexasiloxane (D6), Tetradecamethyl cycloheptasiloxane (D7), Hexadecamethyl cyclooctasiloxane (D8), Octadecamethyl-cyclononasiloxane (D9), Tetracosamethyl-cyclododecasiloxane (D12)
Fig. 3XRD patterns of PG36 a calcined in air (CA800) and b under nitrogen flow (CN800B and CN800R). In panel a, the green solid line corresponds to the experimental data, the black dotted line is the Rietveld fit, whereas the light blue solid line is the fit residual. The reflexes of the phases evidenced in the fit are reported underneath as vertical bars: black CuO, blue SiO2. In panel b, the black solid line corresponds to the experimental data of CN800B, the red solid line to CN800R, the yellow dotted line corresponds to the fit with solely CuO. The reflexes evidences in the data analysis are reported as vertical bars; black CuO, blue SiO2, violet CuBr, light blue CuCl, green Cu2OCl2, orange Cu2O (color figure online)
Hazards associated with the solid residues in the calcined samples CA800, CN800B CN800R
| X-ray phase | Risk code |
|---|---|
| CuCl | H302 Cat. 4 Harmful if swallowed |
| CuBr | H302 Cat. 4 Harmful if swallowed H315 Cat. 2 Causes skin irritation H318 Cat. 1 Causes serious eye damage H335 Cat. 3 May cause respiratory irritation |
| Cu2O | H302 Cat. 4 Harmful if swallowed H318 Cat. 1 Causes serious eye damage H332 Cat. 4 Harmful if inhaled |
| Cu2OCl2 | / |
| CuO | Dose dependent |
| SiO2 | Dose and shape dependent |
Fig. 4Selected SEM images of laser and thermally treated PG36 in water and propan-2-ol dispersion: a is Py800 dispersed in propan-2-ol; b is a magnification of a; c is calcined sample in air and d under N2, both dispersed in propan-2-ol; e through j are PG36 samples dispersed in water and laser treated at different times (indicated in the corresponded panel); k and l are PG36 samples dispersed in propan-2-ol and laser treated. Low fluence (LF) laser-treated samples are reported in panels m for water dispersion and n for propan-2-ol dispersion (color figure online)
Average hydrodynamic diameter 2RH from DLS measurements on PG36 after treatments determined by cumulant analysis and intensity-weighted size distribution by NNLS algorithm
Black fonts correspond to PG36 dispersed in water or propan-2-ol and treated with laser Nd:YAG, the red fonts correspond to thermally treated samples, dispersed afterwards in water or propan-2-ol