Formalin safety in anatomic pathology workflow and integrated air monitoring systems for the formaldehyde occupational exposure assessment

Abstract

The potential carcinogenicity of formaldehyde (FA) has prompted increasing preventive measures in anatomic pathology (AP) laboratories and new strategies aimed at innovating airborne FA monitoring systems. This review provides an updated overview of the most recent improvements in preventive measures, safe practices, and exposure monitoring tools in the FA usage and handling. A computer-based search of scientific and non-scientific sources was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, Google and Google Patents databases, querying the main topics of real-time, in-continuous FA monitoring instruments for sale, and commercially available tools for improving preventive measures in formalin management. In order to simplify the sampling process and to choose a better analytic solution to FA assessment, the main characteristics of each FA monitoring instrument were described. The novel technical tools recently introduced on the global market, aimed at reducing FA emissions in AP laboratories, were summarized. This review is directed at anatomic pathologists to draw their attention to the rapidly growing field of safe formalin practices. A repeated exposure assessment is recommended to evaluate technical changes in air monitoring programs to keep FA emissions low, in compliance with the limit value; thus, evolved monitoring devices are needed.

Effective mitigation strategies for reducing workers’ exposure to formaldehyde: a systematic review

“…This percentage raised up to 88.8-98.1% when the improvement of the ventilation system was combined with a training program to educate local workers and with the use of a negative pressure room (d 'Ettorre et al 2021). Good results were also obtained when the enhancement of the ventilation system was coupled with the use of a vacuum sealing machine and a fume hood computer-based system (Dugheri et al 2020; reduction percentage: 78-95.4%). Ogawa et al (2019) reported a lower reduction percentage (56.7%) when the improvement of the ventilation system was combined with workers' training and the use of a video camera and a volatile organic compound detector (Ogawa et al 2019).…”

The formation of SCEs as an effect of occupational exposure to formaldehyde

“…Currently, although there are alternative methods to the use of FA, such as the practice of Under-Vacuum Sealing (UVS) (Bellisario et al 2016 ), FA is still considered the standard fixative for routine work. In Italy, 1726 workers employed in specialised hospital activities had been estimated to be potentially exposed to FA (Scarselli et al 2017 ; Dugheri et al 2021 ). To safeguard workers occupationally exposed to air-FA, various limits of exposure have been proposed, even though there is no agreement between the international agencies (Dugheri et al 2020 ).…”

“…In Italy, 1726 workers employed in specialised hospital activities had been estimated to be potentially exposed to FA (Scarselli et al 2017 ; Dugheri et al 2021 ). To safeguard workers occupationally exposed to air-FA, various limits of exposure have been proposed, even though there is no agreement between the international agencies (Dugheri et al 2020 ). The current Threshold Limit Value—Time Weighted Average (TLV – TWA) recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) is 120 μg/m 3 (i.e., 0.1 ppm) and is referred to average exposure in eight-hour workdays (Dugheri et al 2020 ).…”

A New Perspective on SPME and SPME Arrow: Formaldehyde Determination by On-Sample Derivatization Coupled with Multiple and Cooling-Assisted Extractions

“…Formaldehyde (FA) is globally synthesized on a large scale by catalytic oxidation of methanol in the vapor phase [ 1 ]. FA is commonly used to produce industrial chemicals [ 2 , 3 , 4 ], and its aqueous solution (known as formalin) has many applications as a sanitizer and preservative [ 5 ].…”