Occupational exposure to 2,4- and 2,6-toluene diisocyanate (2,4- and 2,6-TDI) was measured during the production of flexible foam. The usefulness of urinalysis of the TDI-derived amines, 2,4- and 2,6-toluenediamine (2,4- and 2,6-TDA), for exposure assessment was compared with air monitoring. Urine samples were collected from 17 employees at two plants. The workers' personal exposure was measured using 1-(2-methoxyphenyl)-piperazine (2MP)-impregnated glass fibre filters for sampling and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with ultraviolet (UV) and electrochemical (EC) detection for quantification. The limit of detection (LOD) of 2,4- and 2,6-TDI was 0.01 microtg ml(-1) for a 20 microl injection. The precision of sample preparation, expressed as the relative standard deviation (RSD), was 0.6% with UV detection and 0.8% with EC detection at a 2,4-TDI concentration of 0.2 microg ml(-1) (n = 6). For 2,6-TDI, the corresponding RSDs were 0.5% and 0.8%. The urinary 2,4- and 2,6-TDA metabolites were determined after acid hydrolysis as heptafluorobutyric anhydride derivatives by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The LOD in urine was 0.35 nmol l(-1) for 2,4-TDA and 0.04 nmol l(-1) for 2,6-TDA. The precision (RSD) of six analyses of human urine spiked to a concentration of 100 nmol l(-1) was 3.7% for 2,4-TDA and 3.6% for 2,6-TDA. There was a trend for linear correlation between urinary TDA concentration and the product of airborne TDI concentration and sampling time. Urinalysis of TDA is proposed as a practical method for assessing personal exposures in workers exposed intermittently to TDI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kääriä et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: