Plasma and urine dimercaptopropanesulfonate concentrations after dermal application of transdermal DMPS (TD-DMPS)

Toxic nephropathy secondary to chronic mercury poisoning: clinical characteristics and outcomes

Introduction

Kidney disease secondary to mercury poisoning has not been well documented and is often misdiagnosed and mistreated.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with having mercury poisoning over a 6-year period between July 2013 and June 2019. Demographics, clinical measures, renal pathologic examinations, treatments, and outcomes were compared between patients with kidney disease and those without kidney disease.

Results

Of the 172 patients with mercury poisoning, 46 (26.74%) had renal damage. Among the 46 patients, 41 (89.13%) presented nephrotic syndrome, and 5 (10.87%) showed proteinuria alone. The pathologic abnormality associated with kidney disease caused by mercury poisoning was mainly membranous nephropathy (18 of 35 patients, 51.43%). Among 41 patients with nephrotic syndrome, 25 were treated with chelation therapy alone and 12 with mercury chelation therapy and glucocorticoids. The remaining 4 patients were treated with chelation therapy, glucocorticoids, and immunosuppressive therapies. The overall effective rate was 97.5% (40 patients). There was no significant difference in complete remission rate among the 3 treatment methods (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The main clinical manifestation of kidney disease secondary to chronic mercury poisoning was nephrotic syndrome, which was reflected in pathologic examinations as membranous nephropathy. Kidney disease to chronic mercury poisoning is prone to misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis. Chelation therapy is the main treatment, and the prognosis is good. Patients with severe condition can be supplemented with glucocorticoid.

Wheat bran intake can attenuate chronic cadmium toxicity in mice gut microbiota

Environmental exposure to pollutants such as heavy metals is responsible for various altered physiological functions that are detrimental to health.

Analytical considerations in the clinical laboratory assessment of metals

The presence of metals in the environment is ubiquitous and humans are constantly being exposed to them. As such, a general concern exists about potential health consequences that result from the exposure to metals. The continued efforts of environmental scientists to measure metals in clinical specimens are important for defining the extent of human exposure to these chemicals. Laboratory methods to measure the concentration of metals in human blood or urine are available, and they can be used to assess the extent of human exposure to these chemicals. However, several considerations should be reviewed when requesting a laboratory measurement of metals because some factors can affect the test result or its interpretation. These considerations are discussed in this article and include pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical factors. Clinicians with this knowledge will be able to request these laboratory tests for their patients with enhanced confidence.

Recommendations for provoked challenge urine testing

"Urine mobilization test," "challenge test," and "provoked urine test" are all terms used to describe the administration of a chelating agent to a person prior to collection of their urine to test for metals. There is no standard, validated challenge test. Despite recommendations by professional and government organizations against the use of provoked urine testing, the tests are still commonly used and recommended by some practitioners. Challenge testing utilizes a variety of chelating agents, including dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA), dimercaptopropanesulfonate (DMPS), and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). The agents are given by a variety of routes of administration, doses used are inconsistent, and urine collection procedures vary. Additional problems with challenge tests include comparison of results to inappropriate reference ranges and creatinine correction of urine obtained within hours of chelator administration. Human volunteer studies demonstrate that mercury is detected in the urine of most people even in the absence of known exposure or chelator administration, and that urinary mercury excretion rises after administration of a chelator, regardless of exposure history and in an unpredictable fashion. Studies also demonstrate that challenge testing fails to reveal a "body burden" of mercury due to remote exposure. Chelating agents have been associated with adverse reactions. Current evidence does not support the use of DMPS, DMSA, or other chelation challenge tests for the diagnosis of metal toxicity. Since there are no established reference ranges for provoked urine samples in healthy subjects, no reliable evidence to support a diagnostic value for the tests, and potential harm, these tests should not be utilized.