These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Asbestos exposure and mesothelioma in South Africa.
    Author: Rees D, Goodman K, Fourie E, Chapman R, Blignaut C, Bachmann MO, Myers J.
    Journal: S Afr Med J; 1999 Jun; 89(6):627-34. PubMed ID: 10443212.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To describe the exposure experiences of South African mesothelioma cases, with emphasis on the contribution made to the caseload by different fibre types, the proportion of subjects with no recall of asbestos exposure and only environmental contact, and the importance of putative causes other than asbestos. DESIGN: A multi-centred case-control study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: 123 patients with mesothelioma interviewed by trained interviewers in study centres established in Johannesburg, Kimberley, Pretoria, Bloemfontein, Cape Town and Port Elizabeth. RESULTS: A convincing history of asbestos exposure was obtained in the overwhelming majority of cases (only 5 cases had unlikely asbestos exposure). Twenty-three subjects had worked on Cape crocidolite mines, 3 at Penge (an amosite mine), 3 on mines producing amosite and Transvaal crocidolite and 1 on a Transvaal crocidolite mine. Exclusively environmental exposure accounted for at least 18% of cases; 91% of these cases (20/22 subjects) had had contact with Cape crocidolite. There was a relative paucity of cases linked to amosite and no convincing chrysotile case. Non-asbestos causes occur rarely, if at all, in South Africa. CONCLUSION: The preponderance of crocidolite cases, followed by amosite and then chrysotile cases, is consistent with the view that there is a fibre gradient of mesotheliomagenic potential for South African asbestos (crocidolite > amosite > chrysotile).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]