Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Osier, M.
Right arrow Articles by Oberörster, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Osier, M.
Right arrow Articles by Oberörster, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1997 Oxford University Press

research-article

Intratracheal Inhalation vs Intratracheal Instillation: Differences in Particle Effects

M. Osier and G. Oberörster

Department of Environmental Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine 575 Elmwood Avenue, Box EHSC, Rochester, New York 14642

Received April 1, 1997; accepted October 9, 1997

Our laboratory has developed a method of intratracheal inhalation whereby rats can be exposed to high aerosol concentrations, resulting in high lung particle burdens in a short time period with deposition occurring directly in the lower respiratory tract, thus avoiding many drawbacks of larger nose-only or whole body inhalation systems. In this report, we compare the response of rats exposed by intratracheal inhalation to "fine"({small tilde}210 nm) and "ultrafine" ({small tilde}21 nm) titanium dioxide particles with rats exposed to similar doses by intratracheal instillation. Animals receiving particles through inhalation showed a decreased pulmonary response, measured by bronchoalveolar lavage parameters, in both severity and persistence, when compared with those receiving particles through instillation. These results demonstrate a difference in pulmonary response to an inhaled vs an instilled dose, which may be due to differences in dose rate, particle distribution, or altered clearance between the two methods.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.