Feasibility of Biological Effective Monitoring of Chrome Electroplaters to Chromium through Analysis of Serum Malondialdehyde.

BACKGROUND: Great concern about occupational exposure to chromium (Cr [VI]) has been reported due to escalated risk of lung cancer in exposed workers. Consequences of occupational exposure to Cr (VI) have been reported as oxidative stress and lung tissue damage. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility of biological effect monitoring of chrome electroplaters through analysis of serum malondialdehyde (MDA). METHODS: 90 workers directly involved in chrome electroplating---categorized into three equal groups based on their job as near bath workers, degreaser, and washers---and 30 workers without exposure to Cr (VI), served as the control group, were studied. Personal samples were collected and analyzed according to NIOSH method 7600. Serum MDA level was measured by HPLC using a UV detector. RESULTS: Median Cr (VI) exposure level was 0.38 mg/m(3) in near bath workers, 0.20 mg/m(3) in degreasers, and 0.05 mg/m(3) in washers. The median serum MDA level of three exposed groups (2.76 µmol/L) was significantly (p<0.001) higher than that in the control group (2.00 µmol/L). There was a positive correlation between electroplaters' level of exposure to Cr (VI) and their serum MDA level (Spearman's ρ 0.806, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Serum MDA level is a good biomarker for the level of occupational exposure to Cr (VI) in electroplaters.

Cost efficiency in the prospective diagnosis and follow-up of polyomavirus allograft nephropathy.

Evaluation of urine cytology (UC) for decoy cells and quantitative determinations of viruria (urine viral load [UPCR])and viremia (viral load in blood [VLB]) have been proposed as surrogate markers of polyomavirus allograft nephropathy (PVAN). In this study, we present the experience with the concurrent evaluation of UC, UPCR, and VLB in 349 patients (940 sets of samples). Results were correlated with each other and with a previous, concurrent, or subsequent biopsy diagnosis of PVAN. Patients were followed up for a mean of 27 months posttransplantation. We conclude that both UC and UPCR are useful for screening of renal transplant recipients. Simultaneous performance of both UC and UPCR does not add useful clinical information. In patients with positive UC, performance of UPCR, however, can allow for the distinction between BK and JC polyoma viruses. Quantitative measurement of viremia is not indicated in patients lacking viruria because no patients with PVAN present with this combination of findings. In patients with viruria, a positive viremia strongly correlates with PVAN. Rationale selection of screening protocols based on the current knowledge of the infection and tailored to the available laboratory capabilities in each transplantation center can optimize the use of resources.