4.6 Review

Computational modeling as part of alternative testing strategies in the respiratory and cardiovascular systems: Inhaled nanoparticle dose modeling based on representative aerosol measurements and corresponding toxicological analysis

Journal

NANOTOXICOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages 106-115

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/17435390.2013.861527

Keywords

Computational fluid-particle dynamics; lung transport; nanoparticles; numerical modeling; particle deposition

Funding

  1. project NanoTEST of the European Commission [HEALTH-2008-201335]
  2. GSRT through grant from the O.P. Competitiveness''
  3. European Union - European Regional Development Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objectives of modeling in this work were (a) the integration of two existing numerical models in order to connect external exposure to nanoparticles (NPs) with internal dose through inhalation, and (b) to use computational fluid-particle dynamics (CFPD) to analyze the behavior of NPs in the respiratory and the cardiovascular system. Regarding the first objective, a lung transport and deposition model was combined with a lung clearance/retention model to estimate NPs dose in the different regions of the human respiratory tract and some adjacent tissues. On the other hand, CFPD was used to estimate particle transport and deposition of particles in a physiologically based bifurcation created by the third and fourth lung generations (respiratory system), as well as to predict the fate of super-paramagnetic particles suspended in a liquid under the influence of an external magnetic field (cardiovascular system). All the above studies showed that, with proper refinement, the developed computational models and methodologies may serve as an alternative testing strategy, replacing transport/deposition experiments that are expensive both in time and resources and contribute to risk assessment.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available