Hudák A, Kiss G
National Institute of Occupational Health Budapest, Hungary.
Am J Ind Med. 1991;19(1):59-65. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700190108.
The work was aimed at finding whether the ratio of delta-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) and creatinine (Cn) concentration (ALA/Cn), presently used in occupational health practice for evaluation of lead exposure gives a better assessment of ALA excretion than uncorrected ALA concentration itself, as well as at finding a better, but not complicated method for adjustment. ALA and Cn concentrations were measured in untimed urine samples of altogether 390 men and women (age: 18-60 years) not occupationally exposed to lead. In agreement with others, ALA/Cn was found to be an unsuitable method of adjustment for the differences in ALA concentration due to the different concentrations of samples. This can be explained by the different renal handling of ALA and Cn, proved by the literature data. The exponential relationship between ALA/Cn and Cn concentration raised the possibility of adjustment to the logarithm of Cn concentration (ALA/log.Cn). This simple method provided a more reliable index, the value of which was independent of the actual Cn concentration of urines within a wide range (2-32 mmol/liter). The recommended biological limit value (70 mumol/log.Cn mmol) separates equally well from normal values, both in dilute and concentrated urines. The evaluation of occupational lead exposure might be more reliable using this index, instead of uncorrected ALA concentration or the ALA/Cn ratio.
该研究旨在确定目前职业健康实践中用于评估铅暴露的δ-氨基乙酰丙酸(ALA)与肌酐(Cn)浓度之比(ALA/Cn),相较于未经校正的ALA浓度本身,是否能更好地评估ALA排泄情况,同时找到一种更好且不复杂的校正方法。对390名未职业性接触铅的男性和女性(年龄:18 - 60岁)的随机尿样进行了ALA和Cn浓度测量。与其他研究一致,发现ALA/Cn作为校正ALA浓度差异的方法并不合适,因为样本浓度不同。这可以通过文献数据证明的ALA和Cn在肾脏处理方式上的差异来解释。ALA/Cn与Cn浓度之间的指数关系增加了对Cn浓度的对数进行校正(ALA/log.Cn)的可能性。这种简单方法提供了一个更可靠的指标,其值在较宽的范围内(2 - 32 mmol/升)与尿液的实际Cn浓度无关。推荐的生物限值(70 μmol/log.Cn mmol)在稀释尿和浓缩尿中与正常值的区分效果都同样良好。使用该指标评估职业性铅暴露可能比使用未经校正的ALA浓度或ALA/Cn比值更可靠。