Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Environmental Health, School of Health, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
Environ Monit Assess. 2020 Mar 5;192(4):213. doi: 10.1007/s10661-020-8156-y.
Wet and dry extraction methods are two main methods used in toxicological in vitro and in vivo studies to recover particulate matter (PM) from filter papers. The aim of this study was to extract PM by wet and dry extraction methods and compare the elemental content and carcinogenic risks of extracts. PM samples were collected using fiberglass filters and a high-volume air sampler. For wet extraction, the method involved agitation in water, sonication in water bath, and agitation again. For dry extraction, the filters were sonicated and the PM was recovered using sweeping by a brush. Elemental composition of extracts was determined by inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). Excess lifetime cancer risks (ELCR) of As, Cd, Cr, Ni, and Pb in extracts were estimated. The average recovery efficiency (%) of dry and wet extraction methods were 36.8% and 58.5%, respectively. The average elemental concentration that resulted from dry and wet methods was calculated to be 2.27 and 1.26 μg/m, respectively. The total ELCR of all heavy metals in both methods exceeds the 1 × 10 limit. However, the total ELCR of heavy metals that resulted from the dry method was higher than that from the wet method. In conclusion, the dry method showed to be more effective to recover a representative extract from the filter. This can ultimately lead to a realistic and robust response in toxicological studies. However, a toxicological comparison between the extracts of these two methods is required.
湿提取法和干提取法是毒理学体外和体内研究中用于从滤纸上回收颗粒物（PM）的两种主要方法。本研究旨在通过湿提取法和干提取法提取 PM，并比较提取物的元素含量和致癌风险。使用玻璃纤维过滤器和大容量空气采样器收集 PM 样品。对于湿提取，方法包括在水中搅拌、在水浴中超声以及再次搅拌。对于干提取，将过滤器超声处理，并用刷子清扫回收 PM。通过电感耦合等离子体 - 光学发射光谱法（ICP-OES）测定提取物的元素组成。估计了提取物中 As、Cd、Cr、Ni 和 Pb 的过量终生癌症风险（ELCR）。干提取法和湿提取法的平均回收率（%）分别为 36.8%和 58.5%。计算得出干提取法和湿提取法的平均元素浓度分别为 2.27μg/m 和 1.26μg/m。两种方法中所有重金属的总 ELCR 均超过 1×10 的限值。然而，干提取法产生的重金属总 ELCR 高于湿提取法。总之，干提取法更有效地从滤纸上回收有代表性的提取物。这最终可以在毒理学研究中产生现实和稳健的反应。然而，需要对这两种方法的提取物进行毒理学比较。
