Mussi I, Calzaferri G, Buratti M, Alessio L
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1984;54(2):155-61. doi: 10.1007/BF00378518.
Aluminium in urine (AlU) and in plasma (AlP) was determined in seven subjects occupationally exposed to environmental concentrations of aluminium below or equal to the TWA (5 mg/m3). The AlU levels in these workers were markedly higher than those found in the control group. The levels of the indicator were definitely higher at the end of the shift than at the beginning of the same working day; also, the AlU levels were higher on Friday morning than on Monday morning. After an interruption in work of two weeks, the values of the indicator underwent a marked reduction and were then only slightly higher than those of the control group. Occupational exposure to fumes produced higher AlU levels than exposure to dusts, and in the subjects exposed to fumes the AlU levels were clearly influenced by the degree of exposure. The levels of aluminium in plasma in the exposed workers on the other hand, hardly differed from the levels found in the control group. These data appear to indicate that, whereas AlU allows daily and weekly exposure to be evaluated, AlP cannot be used as an indicator of occupational exposure, at least in the case of brief exposures to environmental concentrations below or equal to the TWA.
对七名职业性接触环境铝浓度低于或等于时间加权平均浓度（5毫克/立方米）的受试者的尿铝（AlU）和血浆铝（AlP）进行了测定。这些工人的AlU水平明显高于对照组。该指标在轮班结束时的水平肯定高于同一工作日开始时；此外，周五上午的AlU水平高于周一上午。在中断工作两周后，该指标的值显著降低，然后仅略高于对照组。职业性接触烟雾产生的AlU水平高于接触粉尘，在接触烟雾的受试者中，AlU水平明显受接触程度的影响。另一方面，接触工人的血浆铝水平与对照组的水平几乎没有差异。这些数据似乎表明，虽然AlU可用于评估每日和每周的接触情况，但AlP不能用作职业接触的指标，至少在短期接触低于或等于时间加权平均浓度的环境浓度的情况下如此。
