Arts J H E, Mojet J, van Gemert L J, Emmen H H, Lammers J H C M, Marquart J, Woutersen R A, Feron V J
Department of Target Organ Toxicology, TNO Nutrition and Food Research, Zeist, The Netherlands.
Crit Rev Toxicol. 2002 Jan;32(1):43-66. doi: 10.1080/20024091064174.
Studies on the irritative effects of acetone vapor in humans and experimental animals have revealed large differences in the lowest acetone concentration found to be irritative to the respiratory tract and eyes. This has brought on much confusion in the process of setting occupational exposure limits for acetone. A literature survey was carried out focusing on the differences in results between studies using subjective (neuro)behavioral methods (questionnaires) and studies using objective measurements to detect odor and irritation thresholds. A critical review of published studies revealed that the odor detection threshold of acetone ranges from about 20 to about 400 ppm. Loss of sensitivity due to adaptation and/or habituation to acetone odor may occur, as was shown in studies comparing workers previously exposed to acetone with previously unexposed subjects. It further appeared that the sensory irritation threshold of acetone lies between 10,000 and 40,000 ppm. Thus, the threshold for sensory irritation is much higher than the odor detection limit, a conclusion that is supported by observations in anosmics, showing a ten times higher irritation threshold level than the odor threshold found in normosmics. The two-times higher sensory irritation threshold observed in acetone-exposed workers compared with previously nonexposed controls can apart from adaptation be ascribed to habituation. An evaluation of studies on subjectively reported irritation at acetone concentrations < 1000 ppm shows that perception of odor intensity, information bias, and exposure history (i.e., habituation) are confounding factors in the reporting of irritation thresholds and health symptoms. In conclusion, subjective measures alone are inappropriate for establishing sensory irritation effects and sensory irritation threshold levels of odorants such as acetone. Clearly, the sensory irritation threshold of acetone should be based on objective measurements.
对丙酮蒸气在人类和实验动物中的刺激作用研究表明，在发现对呼吸道和眼睛有刺激作用的最低丙酮浓度方面存在很大差异。这在设定丙酮职业接触限值的过程中引发了诸多困惑。开展了一项文献调查，重点关注使用主观（神经）行为方法（问卷调查）的研究与使用客观测量来检测气味和刺激阈值的研究之间结果的差异。对已发表研究的批判性综述表明，丙酮的气味检测阈值范围约为20至约400 ppm。如比较先前接触丙酮的工人与未接触过的受试者的研究所示，可能会因对丙酮气味的适应和/或习惯化而导致敏感性丧失。进一步发现，丙酮的感觉刺激阈值在10,000至40,000 ppm之间。因此，感觉刺激阈值远高于气味检测极限，这一结论得到嗅觉缺失者观察结果的支持，表明其刺激阈值水平比正常嗅觉者的气味阈值高十倍。与先前未接触过的对照组相比，接触丙酮的工人观察到的感觉刺激阈值高出两倍，除了适应之外，这可归因于习惯化。对丙酮浓度<1000 ppm时主观报告的刺激研究的评估表明，气味强度感知、信息偏差和接触史（即习惯化）是刺激阈值和健康症状报告中的混杂因素。总之，仅靠主观测量不适用于确定丙酮等气味剂的感觉刺激效应和感觉刺激阈值水平。显然，丙酮的感觉刺激阈值应基于客观测量。
