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: Field evaluation of endotoxin air sampling assay methods.
    Author: Thorne PS, Reynolds SJ, Milton DK, Bloebaum PD, Zhang X, Whitten P, Burmeister LF.
    Journal: Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 1997 Nov; 58(11):792-9. PubMed ID: 9373925.
    Abstract:
    This study tested the importance of filter media, extraction and assay protocol, and bioaerosol source on the determination of endotoxin under field conditions in swine and poultry confinement buildings. Multiple simultaneous air samples were collected using glass fiber (GF) and polycarbonate (PC) filters, and these were assayed using two methods in two separate laboratories: an endpoint chromogenic Limulus amebocyte lysate (LAL) assay (QCL) performed in water and a kinetic chromogenic LAL assay (KQCL) performed in buffer with resistant-parallel line estimation analysis (KLARE). In addition, two aqueous filter extraction methods were compared in the QCL assay: 120 min extraction at 22 degrees C with vigorous shaking and 30 min extraction at 68 degrees C with gentle rocking. These extraction methods yielded endotoxin activities that were not significantly different and were very highly correlated. Reproducibility of endotoxin determinations from duplicate air sampling filters was very high (Cronbach alpha all > 0.94). When analyzed by the QCL method GF filters yielded significantly higher endotoxin activity than PC filters. QCL and KLARE methods gave similar estimates for endotoxin activity from PC filters; however, GF filters analyzed by the QCL method yielded significantly higher endotoxin activity estimates, suggesting enhancement of the QCL assay or inhibition of the KLARE asay with GF filters. Correlation between QCL-GF and QCL-PC was high (r = 0.98) while that between KLARE-GF and KLARE-PC was moderate (r = 0.68). Analysis of variance demonstrated that assay methodology, filter-type, barn-type, and interactions between assay and filter-type and between assay and barn-type were important factors influencing endotoxin exposure assessment.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]