Spaan Suzanne, Heederik Dick J J, Thorne Peter S, Wouters Inge M
Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Division Environmental Epidemiology, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80178, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Oct;73(19):6134-43. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00851-07. Epub 2007 Aug 3.
Endotoxin exposure occurs in homes and occupational environments and is known to cause adverse health effects. In order to compare results from different studies and establish standards, airborne endotoxin exposures should be assessed using standardized methods. Although the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) developed guidelines for endotoxin exposure assessment, these leave room for individual interpretation. The influence of methods of sampling, extraction, and analysis has never been investigated in a full experimental design. Thus, we sought to fully elucidate the importance of all facets of endotoxin assessment. Inhalable dust samples collected simultaneously were used to investigate the effects on and interactions with airborne endotoxin concentration in two working environments of filter type (glass fiber or Teflon), transport conditions (with/without desiccant), sample storage (-20 or 4 degrees C), extraction solution (pyrogen-free water [PFW] or PFW plus 0.05% Tween 20), extract storage (-20 or 4 degrees C), and assay solution (PFW or PFW plus 0.05% Tween 20). Four hundred samples were collected and randomly distributed over the 20 combinations of treatments. There were no differences found for transport conditions and storage temperature of extracts. Also, no interactions between study variables existed. Sampling on glass-fiber filters, storage of samples in the freezer, and extraction in PFW plus 0.05% Tween 20 resulted in 1.3-, 1.1-, and 2.1-fold-higher estimated endotoxin concentrations, respectively. Use of PFW plus 0.05% Tween 20 in the assay solution had an additive effect. Thus, this study investigated gaps in the CEN protocol and provides data with which to fully specify a protocol for standardization of endotoxin exposure assessment.
内毒素暴露发生在家庭和职业环境中,已知会对健康产生不良影响。为了比较不同研究的结果并制定标准,应使用标准化方法评估空气中的内毒素暴露。尽管欧洲标准化委员会(CEN)制定了内毒素暴露评估指南,但这些指南仍存在个人解释的空间。在完整的实验设计中,从未研究过采样、提取和分析方法的影响。因此,我们试图全面阐明内毒素评估各个方面的重要性。同时收集的可吸入粉尘样本用于研究在两种工作环境中,过滤器类型(玻璃纤维或聚四氟乙烯)、运输条件(有无干燥剂)、样本储存(-20或4摄氏度)、提取溶液(无热原水[PFW]或PFW加0.05%吐温20)、提取物储存(-20或4摄氏度)和测定溶液(PFW或PFW加0.05%吐温20)对空气中内毒素浓度的影响及其相互作用。共收集了400个样本,并随机分布在20种处理组合中。提取物的运输条件和储存温度没有差异。此外,研究变量之间不存在相互作用。在玻璃纤维过滤器上采样、将样本储存在冰箱中以及用PFW加0.05%吐温20进行提取,估计的内毒素浓度分别高出1.3倍、1.1倍和2.1倍。在测定溶液中使用PFW加0.05%吐温20有累加效应。因此,本研究调查了CEN协议中的空白,并提供了数据以全面指定内毒素暴露评估标准化协议。