4.7 Article

Evaluation of Pulmonary Toxicity of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles Following Inhalation and Intratracheal Instillation

Journal

Publisher

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/ijms17081241

Keywords

zinc oxide; nanoparticle; CINC; neutrophil; intratracheal instillation; lung; inhalation

Funding

  1. Development of Innovative Methodology for Safety Assessment of Industrial Nanomaterials by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) of Tokyo, Japan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We conducted inhalation and intratracheal instillation studies of zinc oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles in order to examine their pulmonary toxicity. F344 rats were received intratracheal instillation at 0.2 or 1 mg of ZnO nanoparticles with a primary diameter of 35 nm that were well-dispersed in distilled water. Cell analysis and chemokines in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) were analyzed at three days, one week, one month, three months, and six months after the instillation. As the inhalation study, rats were exposed to a concentration of inhaled ZnO nanoparticles (2 and 10 mg/m(3)) for four weeks (6 h/day, 5 days/week). The same endpoints as in the intratracheal instillation study were analyzed at three days, one month, and three months after the end of the exposure. In the intratracheal instillation study, both the 0.2 and the 1.0 mg ZnO groups had a transient increase in the total cell and neutrophil count in the BALF and in the expression of cytokine-induced neutrophil chemoattractant (CINC)-1, CINC-2, chemokine for neutrophil, and heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1), an oxidative stress marker, in the BALF. In the inhalation study, transient increases in total cell and neutrophil count, CINC-1,-2 and HO-1 in the BALF were observed in the high concentration groups. Neither of the studies of ZnO nanoparticles showed persistent inflammation in the rat lung, suggesting that well-dispersed ZnO nanoparticles have low toxicity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available