4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

In vitro dissolution studies of uranium bearing material in simulated lung fluid

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
Volume 99, Issue 3, Pages 527-538

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2007.08.009

Keywords

uranium; in vitro dissolution; simulated lung solution; lung retention half-times

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Inhaled uranium (U) bearing material will partially dissolve in the fluid lining of the lung, followed by a combination of retention, re-distribution, and excretion of the U. The rate. of dissolution influences the retention time at the site of deposition, and the extent to which the material is available for re-distribution to other tissues. The consequential radiation dose is dependent upon the material distribution in the body and the exposure time to various tissues. The International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP 66 [International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), 1994. Human Respiratory Tract Model for Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 66] recommends the use of experimentally determined solubility coefficients in dose modelling. Material specific absorption parameters allow for better dose estimation than using ICRP default values for F (fast), M (moderate) and S (slow) classifications of U compounds. In vitro dissolution tests were carried out on U material collected from two U mines located in Australia. A static technique was designed in which particle samples were sandwiched between two 0.1 mu m pore size membrane filters. The filter sandwich was exposed to a solvent (simulated lung fluid) for selected time intervals, at controlled test conditions for temperature and pH. The collected solution was analysed for U concentration using ICP-MS. The resulting dissolution curves were fitted with a double or triple exponential equation to determine the dissolution coefficients. Crown Copyright (C) 2007 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available