Acute respiratory distress syndrome after accidental inhalation of fluorocarbon monomers and pyrolysis products: Table 1

Tan, Dingyu; Wang, Chen; Ling, Jun; Xia, Zhongfang; Xu, Jiyang

doi:10.1136/oemed-2015-103185

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If the dust particles penetrated deeply into the lungs, they may have inhibited lung surfactant function, causing the workers symptoms. In their case Tan et al [ 28 ] indicated that the pyrolysis products that had been released in open air ‘entered the workshop through ventilation holes on the top of the building’s wall’; thus the workers had been exposed during the night and were then admitted to hospital after their shift (an exact time was not reported) [ 17 ]. It was indicated that (similar to our case) the workers were not warned by odor or visual smoke, and they had been exposed for several hours during their shift before symptoms occurred.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies suggest that the particle size and number characteristics of inhaled sprays could play a role in the acute pulmonary toxicity [ 2 , 5 , 20 , 21 ]. Waterproofing agents that interact with the thin film of liquid covering the alveoli implicate lung surfactant deterioration as the cause of the respiratory problems [ 6 , 17 , 19 – 28 ]. Some authors have also made reference to “polymer fume fever”, that has been observed after inhalation of pyrolysis products of e.g., polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon) [ 2 , 6 , 29 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pulmonary injury associated with spray of a water-based nano-sized waterproofing product: a case study

Scheepers

Masen-Poos

Rooy

et al. 2017

J Occup Med Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn most reported cases of lung trauma with water proofing products, volatile organic compounds (VOC) have a prominent role. Here we report on a case involving ten workers exposed to a sprayed product containing nanoparticles in a water solution with only a few percent VOC.Case presentationTen workers suffered from respiratory symptoms following spray impregnation of hardwood furniture using a waterproofing product that contained positively charged fluorinated acrylate copolymer solid cores with a median diameter of 70 nm (1.3 w%) in aqueous suspension with 3.3 w% VOC and 0.3 w% quaternary ammonium. The worker who applied one liter of the product in a wood workshop, using an air mix spray gun, did not report any health complaints. Another worker, who entered the workshop 3 h later and had rolled and smoked two cigarettes, was hospitalized with severe chemical pneumonitis. A chest X-ray (CXR) showed bilateral infiltrative impairment in the lower lobe regions. On the next day a second CXR showed increased patchiness marking in all fields. A high-resolution Computer Tomography (CT)-scan demonstrated extensive bilateral areas of ground-glass opacities predominantly in the lower regions of the upper lobes, the right middle lobe and the apical regions of the lower lobes, compatible with severe chemical pneumonitis. On the following morning, nine workers in an adjacent workplace in the same building, experienced dry cough, chest tightness and substernal pain upon physical exercise. Reconstruction of the spray application in a climate chamber confirmed trimethyl silanol, glycol ethers and fluoroalkenes in the gas phase. Immediately after the spray application, aerosols were observed at a maximum concentration of 6.3 × 104 cm−3. Mass concentrations were 0.095 and 10 mg/m3 in the size ranges 5.6-560 nm and 0.22-30 μm, respectively, decreasing to less than 10 μg/m3 in both size ranges after 15 h.ConclusionThe hospitalized worker had smoked cigarettes contaminated with fluoropolymers which is a plausible explanation for the lung trauma. Respiratory symptoms in the nine workers may be caused by inhalation of particles that became airborne by resuspension from surfaces when workers entered the adjacent workplace the next day. A contribution from VOC appears less likely because measurements and modelling showed that concentrations in the mg/m3 range could have occurred only if the building was assumed to be completely airtight.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12995-017-0180-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pulmonary injury associated with spray of a water-based nano-sized waterproofing product: a case study

Scheepers

Masen-Poos

Rooy

et al. 2017

J Occup Med Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La investigación reveló que una fábrica vecina -a 35 m del taller afectado-había liberado los residuos de fluoro carbono, pero había omitido impensadamente rociar agua en los desechos y provocado, así, el accidente. 85 En Suiza, entre octubre de 2002 y marzo de 2003, se produjo un brote agudo tras la exposición a impermeabilizantes. Se notificaron 180 casos (previamente se habían registrado menos de 10 casos/ año).…”

Section: Nhs Por Impermeabilizantesunclassified

Enfermedades del intersticio pulmonar de causa laboral. Parte II

Rey¹

2023

Rev Am Med Resp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Acute respiratory distress syndrome after accidental inhalation of fluorocarbon monomers and pyrolysis products: Table 1

Cited by 2 publications

References 4 publications

Pulmonary injury associated with spray of a water-based nano-sized waterproofing product: a case study

Pulmonary injury associated with spray of a water-based nano-sized waterproofing product: a case study

Enfermedades del intersticio pulmonar de causa laboral. Parte II

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About