4.5 Article

Development of a sensitive, generic and easy to use organophosphate skin disclosure kit

期刊

TOXICOLOGY LETTERS
卷 280, 期 -, 页码 190-194

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2017.08.021

关键词

Chemical warfare agents; Nerve agents; Pesticide; Skin; Detection

资金

  1. German Ministry of Defence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Various organophosphorus compounds (OP), primarily the nerve agent VX and other V-agents, are highly toxic to humans after skin exposure. Percutaneous exposure by such OP results in a delayed onset of toxic signs which enables the initiation of specific countermeasures if contamination is detected rapidly. Presently available mobile detection systems can hardly detect skin exposure by low volatile OP. In order to fill this gap an OP skin disclosure kit was developed which should fulfill different requirements, i.e. (1) a high sensitivity, (2) coverage of human toxic OP, (3) easy handling, (4) rapid results, (5) small dimension and weight. The kit includes a cotton swab to sample skin, human AChE as target and chemicals for a color reaction based on the Ellman assay which is recorded by visual inspection. OP is dissolved from the sampler in a test tube filled with phosphate buffer (0.1 M, pH 7.4) and incubated with lyophilized human AChE for 1 min. The reaction with acetylthiocholine and 5,5'-dithio-bis-2-nitrobenzoic acid (1 min) results in a rich yellow color in the absence of OP and in contrast, in transparent or pale yellow buffer in the presence of OP. At the recommended conditions, the limit of detection is 100 ng VX and Russian VX and 50 ng Chinese VX on plain surface and 200 ng VX on rat skin. With activated pesticides, paraoxon and malaoxon, a concentration of similar to 10 mu g can be detected on plain surface. The ready-to-use kit has a weight of 16 g and a size of 10 x 12 x 1 cm. In the end, this kit has the potential to fill a major gap and to enable timely detection of OP skin exposure and initiation of life-saving countermeasures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据