Determination of fluoride in human nails via cyclic instrumental neutron activation analysis

Spate, V. L.; Morris, J. S.; Baskett, C. K.; Mason, M. M.; Reams, C. L.; Hunter, David J.; Willett, Walter C.

doi:10.1007/bf02037921

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are some reports in the literature concerning the use of nails as biomarkers of fluoride exposure in animals [Buzalaf et al, 2002b] and humans [Schamschula et al, 1985;Machoy, 1989;Czarnowski and Krechniak, 1990;Schmidt and Leuschke, 1990;Spate et al, 1994;Czarnowski et al, 1996;Whitford et al, 1999]. However, this is the first study in which the possibility of using nails as biomarkers of subchronic exposure from fluoride dentifrice in children at the age of risk for dental fluorosis on the permanent central incisors was investigated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Fingernails and Toenails as Biomarkers of Subchronic Exposure to Fluoride from Dentifrice in 2- to 3-Year-Old Children

Rodrigues¹,

Bastos²,

Buzalaf

2004

Caries Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work evaluated the use of fingernails and toenails as biomarkers of subchronic exposure to fluoride (F) from fluoride dentifrice (FD) in 2- to 3-year-old children. Ten 2- to 3-year-old children used a placebo dentifrice (without F) for 28 days, FD (1,570 ppm F as monofluorophosphate) for the following 28 days, and then placebo dentifrice for an additional 28 days, then returned to their usual dentifrices. Fingernails and toenails were clipped every 2 weeks, during the experimental period and for an additional 22 weeks. Nail F was analyzed by electrode following hexamethyldisiloxane-facilitated diffusion. There were no significant differences between fingernail and toenail F concentrations. Mean peak F concentrations occurred 16 weeks after starting the use of FD. Results suggest that fingernails and toenails may be suitable biomarkers of subchronic exposure to F from FD in small children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Fingernails and Toenails as Biomarkers of Subchronic Exposure to Fluoride from Dentifrice in 2- to 3-Year-Old Children

Rodrigues¹,

Bastos²,

Buzalaf

2004

Caries Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the total F exposure in relation to all sources of F was not determined in this study due to the large sample size. We followed previous studies that evaluated the relationship between F concentrations in the drinking water and in the nails [Schamschula et al, 1985;Machoy, 1989;Spate et al, 1994;Whitford et al, 1999;Levy et al, 2004].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Especially for F, nail clippings could play a relevant role to monitor F exposure and estimate risk for fluorosis. There are reports suggesting the use of nails as a biomarker for F exposure in animals [Buzalaf et al, 2002 and humans [Schamschula et al, 1985;Machoy, 1989;Czarnowski and Krechniak, 1990;Schmidt and Leuschke, 1990;Spate et al, 1994;Whitford et al, 1999;Levy et al, 2004;Rodrigues et al, 2004;Buzalaf et al, 2006]. Both fingernails and toenails have been used for this purpose, but the literature is contradictory regarding the relationship between fingernail and toenail F concentrations [Machoy, 1989;Whitford et al, 1999;Levy et al, 2004;Rodrigues et al, 2004;Buzalaf et al, 2006].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental and Individual Factors Associated with Nail Fluoride Concentration

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nails have been suggested as suitable biomarkers of exposure to F, with the advantage of being easily obtained. The effect of water F concentration, age, gender, nail growth rate and geographical area on the F concentration in the fingernail and toenail clippings were evaluated. Volunteers (n = 300) aged 3–7, 14–20, 30–40 and 50–60 years from five Brazilian communities (A–E) participated. Drinking water and nail samples were collected and F concentration was analyzed with the electrode. A reference mark was made on each nail and growth rates were calculated. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and linear regression (α = 0.05). Mean water F concentrations (± SE, mg/l) were 0.09 ± 0.01, 0.15 ± 0.01, 0.66 ± 0.01, 0.72 ± 0.02, and 1.68 ± 0.08 for A–E, respectively. Mean F concentrations (± SE, mg/kg) ranged between 1.38 ± 0.14 (A, 50–60 years) and 10.20 ± 2.35 (D, 50–60 years) for fingernails, and between 0.92 ± 0.08 (A, 14–20 years) and 7.35 ± 0.80 (E, 50–60 years) for toenails. Among the tested factors, geographical area and water F concentration exerted the most influence on finger- and toenail F concentrations. Subjects of older age groups (30–40 and 50–60 years) from D and E showed higher nail F concentrations than the others. Females presented higher nail F concentration than males. Water F concentration, age, gender and geographical area influenced the F concentration of finger- and toenails, and hence should be taken into account when using this biomarker of exposure to predict risk for dental fluorosis.

show abstract

“…These very high concentrations suggest that the nails were not sufficiently decontaminated prior to analysis or that an undetected analytical error confounded the results. Spate et al [1994] used neutron activation analysis to determine the fluoride concentrations in toenails obtained from women who were residents of Holden or Boston, Mass., where the water supplies contained 0.09 and 1.0 ppm, respectively. The average concentrations (with ranges) were 4.2 (2.4-9.7) and 6.4 (2.7-10.1) mg/kg.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fingernail Fluoride: A Method for Monitoring Fluoride Exposure

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work was based on the hypothesis that fingernail clippings can be used as a biomarker for the subchronic exposure to fluoride. The results provide data on factors that may affect the concentration of fluoride in fingernail clippings as determined with the electrode following HMDS–facilitated diffusion. The following variables had only minor or no effects on the concentrations: (1) the surface area of the clippings (intact, minced or filed into powder) that were placed into the diffusion dishes; (2) soaking in deionized water for up to 6 h; (3) soaking in fluoridated water (1.0 ppm) for 2 h, and (4) removal of the organic material of nails by dry ashing. Fingernail fluoride concentrations were approximately 50% higher than those in toenails. A 1–month period of increased fluoride intake by one of the authors resulted in significant increases in fingernail fluoride concentrations after a lag time of approximately 3.5 months. The fluoride concentrations in fingernail clippings obtained from three groups of Brazilian children were directly related to the concentrations in the drinking water (0.1, 1.6 or 2.3 ppm). The results indicate that: (1) HMDS–facilitated diffusion completely separates fluoride from intact nail clippings, so the need for ashing or other preparative methods is obviated; (2) fingernail fluoride is derived mainly from the systemic circulation, and (3) fluoride intake is reflected by the concentrations in fingernails.

show abstract

Determination of fluoride in human nails via cyclic instrumental neutron activation analysis

Cited by 24 publications

References 6 publications

Fingernails and Toenails as Biomarkers of Subchronic Exposure to Fluoride from Dentifrice in 2- to 3-Year-Old Children

Fingernails and Toenails as Biomarkers of Subchronic Exposure to Fluoride from Dentifrice in 2- to 3-Year-Old Children

Environmental and Individual Factors Associated with Nail Fluoride Concentration

Fingernail Fluoride: A Method for Monitoring Fluoride Exposure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About