[Acute alveolitis after using a waterproofing aerosol: apropos of 2 cases]

Pulmonary injury associated with spray of a water-based nano-sized waterproofing product: a case study

Background

In most reported cases of lung trauma with water proofing products, volatile organic compounds (VOC) have a prominent role. Here we report on a case involving ten workers exposed to a sprayed product containing nanoparticles in a water solution with only a few percent VOC.

Case presentation

Ten workers suffered from respiratory symptoms following spray impregnation of hardwood furniture using a waterproofing product that contained positively charged fluorinated acrylate copolymer solid cores with a median diameter of 70 nm (1.3 w%) in aqueous suspension with 3.3 w% VOC and 0.3 w% quaternary ammonium. The worker who applied one liter of the product in a wood workshop, using an air mix spray gun, did not report any health complaints. Another worker, who entered the workshop 3 h later and had rolled and smoked two cigarettes, was hospitalized with severe chemical pneumonitis. A chest X-ray (CXR) showed bilateral infiltrative impairment in the lower lobe regions. On the next day a second CXR showed increased patchiness marking in all fields. A high-resolution Computer Tomography (CT)-scan demonstrated extensive bilateral areas of ground-glass opacities predominantly in the lower regions of the upper lobes, the right middle lobe and the apical regions of the lower lobes, compatible with severe chemical pneumonitis. On the following morning, nine workers in an adjacent workplace in the same building, experienced dry cough, chest tightness and substernal pain upon physical exercise. Reconstruction of the spray application in a climate chamber confirmed trimethyl silanol, glycol ethers and fluoroalkenes in the gas phase. Immediately after the spray application, aerosols were observed at a maximum concentration of 6.3 × 10⁴ cm⁻³. Mass concentrations were 0.095 and 10 mg/m³ in the size ranges 5.6-560 nm and 0.22-30 μm, respectively, decreasing to less than 10 μg/m³ in both size ranges after 15 h.

Conclusion

The hospitalized worker had smoked cigarettes contaminated with fluoropolymers which is a plausible explanation for the lung trauma. Respiratory symptoms in the nine workers may be caused by inhalation of particles that became airborne by resuspension from surfaces when workers entered the adjacent workplace the next day. A contribution from VOC appears less likely because measurements and modelling showed that concentrations in the mg/m³ range could have occurred only if the building was assumed to be completely airtight.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12995-017-0180-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Toxic alveolitis after inhalation of a water repellent

Inhalation of fluorocarbon polymers can cause pulmonary toxicity. Although multiple cases of lung injury have been reported, cellular characterization of the associated alveolitis occurring acutely after inhalation is limited. We report the case of a previously healthy woman who presented at our Emergency Department with an acute pneumonitis following inhalation of a fluorocarbon polymer-based rain-proofing spray. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) performed shortly after the presentation showed an elevated total cell count, with a high proportion of neutrophils (58%) and eosinophils (9%). In addition, a lipid stain (Oil-Red-O-stain) showed a high level of lipid laden macrophages, a marker that could reflect a direct toxic effect of the spray on alveolar cells. The patient made a full recovery after four days of in-hospital observation with supportive care.

Hill Walkers’ Lung

A previously healthy female presented with a 7-week history of dyspnoea on exertion following inhalation of a fluorochemical-based water repellent spray, which was applied to footwear, in the living area that she shared with 8 members of her family while on a hill walking holiday. Clinical examination, serial lung function studies, bronchoalveolar lavage, transbronchial biopsies and high-resolution CT thorax confirmed a sub-acute interstitial pneumonitis, which did not resolve until 15 weeks following exposure. None of her family members were affected despite similar exposure. Interstitial pneumonitis due to inhalation of fluorochemical-based water repellent, though rarely described, usually presents in an acute severe form necessitating immediate therapy and resolves in 1-4 weeks. Pulmonary fibrosis can also occur. Sub-acute interstitial pneumonitis following inhalation of fluorochemical-based water repellent spray should always be considered as a cause of unexplained persistent respiratory symptoms in otherwise healthy individuals involved in outdoor pursuits.

Acute pulmonary toxicity following occupational exposure to a floor stain protector in the building industry in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Waterproofing agents are widely applied to leather and textile garments; they are also used as floor stain protectors by professionals. Acute respiratory injury is described in three cases of young healthy adults following occupational inhalation of a new waterproofing formulation containing an acrylate fluoropolymer. Within 1 or 2 h after exposure they developed a rapidly progressive dyspnoea; two of them had hypoxaemia and flu-like reactions. All patients improved with supportive treatment in a few days. The mechanism of toxicity is still under investigation, but experimental data suggest the role of this new acrylate fluoropolymer.

CONCLUSION

Tilers should be warned against spraying floor stain repellents; there is also a need to make consumers aware that the spraying of waterproofing agents in a closed environment and concomitant smoking should be avoided.