4.7 Article

Differential responses of rat alveolar and peritoneal macrophages to man-made vitreous fibers in vitro

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
Volume 85, Issue 3, Pages 207-214

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1006/enrs.2001.4234

Keywords

alveolar macrophages; peritoneal macrophages; rat; phagocytosis; reactive oxygen species

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Different approaches, including inhalation and intraperitoneal injection assays, have been used to assess the potential health effects of man-made vitreous fibers (MMVF), The purpose of this study was to compare the phagocytic activity and the formation of reactive oxygen species by rat alveolar macrophages (AM) and peritoneal macrophages (PM) upon exposure to MMVF10 glass wool and MMVF21 rock wool fibers. Macrophage (Me) (phi) phagocytosis of mineral fibers was assessed by optical videomicroscopy and computer-aided image analysis. M phi were classified as cells not associated with fibers, cells with attached fibers, cells with incompletely phagocytized fibers (an appearance known as frustrated phagocytosis), and cells with completely phagocytized fibers. The production of superoxide anions by AM and PM upon incubation with MMVF10 and MMVF21 fibers was determined by the superoxide dismutase-inhibitable reduction of ferricytochrome C, PM were found to have a lower phagocytic activity than AM. A significantly higher percentage of AM than of PM underwent frustrated phagocytosis of MMVF10 and MMVF21 fibers. In line with these findings, AM generated higher levels of oxygen radicals than PM upon exposure to MMVFS1 fibers. In contrast, MMVF10 fibers failed to induce the generation of reactive oxygen species by both AM and PM. Our in vitro results show that the phagocytic activity, in particular the frustrated phagocytosis of mineral fibers, was significantly lower in PM than in AM, The data support the idea that the durability and biopersistence of mineral fibers are higher in the peritoneal cavity than in the lung. (C) 2001 Academic Press.

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