Nephrotoxicity pp 127-132 | Cite as

Nephrotoxicity of Uranyl Fluoride and Reversibility of Renal Injury in the Rat

  • G. L. Diamond
  • P. E. Morrow
  • B. J. Panner
  • R. M. Gelein
  • R. B. Baggs

Abstract

Recent accidental exposures of workers and members of the public to uranium hexafluoride (UF6) releases have reinforced interest in the nephrotoxic properties of uranium compounds (1). Additionally, a large industrial work force is engaged in several types of uranium production operations in which intermittent exposures frequently occur. Despite recent improvements in our understanding of the toxicology and biokinetics of uranium, there remain several important issues for which there are virtually no occupational or experimental data. Foremost of these issues is the time course and extent to which nephrotoxic actions of uranyl uranium are reversible, particularly after exposures at or near the socalled threshold for injury of 3 ug U/g kidney (2–5). More-over, better procedures for detecting uranium-induced renal injury need to be identified, particularly for injury associated with exposure to occupationally relevant uranium compounds. The objective of the present study was to examine severity and duration of renal injury produced in the rat from exposures to low levels of uranyl fluoride (UO2F2).

Keywords

Renal Injury Brush Border High Dose Group Uranium Hexafluoride Uranium Compound 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,Assessment of the Public Health Impact from the Accidental Release of UF6 at the Sequoya Fuels Corporation Facility of Gore, Oklahoma, USNRC Report NUREG-1189, Vol. 1, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    U.S. Uranium Registry, “Biokinetics and Analysis of Uranium in Man, ” USUR-05 HEHF-47, 1984.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    W.L. Spoor and J.N. Hursh, “Protection Criteria, ” In: Uranium, Plutonium and Transplutonic Elements, H.C. Hodge, J.N. Stannard and J.B. Hursh, Eds. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1973) , pp. 241–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. E. Morrow, L.J. Leach, F.A. Smith, R.M. Gelein, J.B. Scott, H.D. Beiter, F.J. Amato, J.J. Picano, C.L. Yuile and C.T. Consler, “Metabolic fate and evaluation of injury in rats and dogs following exposure to the hydrolysis products of uranium hexafluroide, ” NUREG/CR-2268, 1981.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D.P. Haley, R.E. Bulger and D.C. Dobyan, “The long-term effects of uranyl nitrate on the structure and function of the rat kidney, ” Virchows. Arch. (Cell Pathol. ) 41, 181–192 (1982).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R.K. Zalups and G.L. Diamond, “Mercuric chloride-induced nephrotoxicity in the rat: Effect of unilateral nephrectomy and compensatory renal growth, ” Virchows. Arch. (B. Cell Pathol. ), in press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. L. Diamond
    • 1
  • P. E. Morrow
    • 1
  • B. J. Panner
    • 1
  • R. M. Gelein
    • 1
  • R. B. Baggs
    • 1
  1. 1.Environmental Health Science CenterUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations