4.6 Article

Biodistribution of inhaled metal oxide nanoparticles mimicking occupational exposure: a preliminary investigation using enhanced darkfield microscopy

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOPHOTONICS
Volume 9, Issue 10, Pages 987-993

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jbio.201600125

Keywords

inhalation exposure; enhanced darkfield microscopy; engineered nanomaterials; histological samples

Funding

  1. CDC-NIOSH [OH-009990-01A1]
  2. NIEHS Center [ES01247]
  3. NanoHealth and Safety Center, New York State

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Inhalation exposure to engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) may result in adverse pulmonary and/or systemic health effects. In this study, enhanced darkfield microscopy (EDFM) was used as a novel approach to visualizing industrial metal oxide nanoparticles (NPs) (silica, ceria, or alumina) in multiple tissue types following inhalation in rats mimicking occupational exposures. Advantages of EDFM over electron microscopy (EM) include reduced cost, time, and ease of sample preparation and operation. Following 4-6 hour inhalation exposures at three concentrations (3.5-34.0 mg/m(3)), lungs and secondary organs were harvested at 24 hours or 7 days post-exposure and prepared for brightfield (BF) microscopy and EDFM. NPs were visualized within the lung and associated lymphatic tissues and in major organs of excretion (liver, spleen, kidney). EDFM also revealed NPs within pulmonary blood vessels and localization within specific regions of toxicological relevance in liver and kidney, indicating pathways of excretion. Results demonstrate the utility of EDFM for rapid direct visualization of NPs in various tissue types and suggest the potential for metal oxide NPs to distribute to secondary tissues following inhalation exposure. Confirmation of the composition, distribution, and relative abundance of inhaled NPs will be pursued by combining EDFM with hyperspectral imaging (HSI) and mapping.

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