Conclusion
There were no statistically significant differences between AM operators and controls for the different health examinations, which may be due to the low number of participants. However, the observed difference in the PC lipid profile in exhaled particles indicates a possible impact of the exposure and could be used as possible early biomarkers of adverse effects in the airways.
Methods
In total, 18 subjects working with different additive manufacturing techniques and production of filament with polymer feedstock and 20 controls participated in the study. Study subjects filled out a questionnaire and underwent blood and urine sampling, spirometry, impulse oscillometry (IOS), exhaled NO test (FeNO), and collection of particles in exhaled air (PEx), and the exposure was assessed. Analysis of exhaled particles included lung surfactant components such as surfactant protein A (SP-A) and phosphatidylcholines. SP-A and albumin were determined using ELISA. Using reversed-phase liquid chromatography and targeted mass spectrometry, the relative abundance of 15 species of phosphatidylcholine (PC) was determined in exhaled particles. The
Results
Exposure and emission measurements in AM settings revealed a large variation in particle and VOC concentrations as well as the composition of VOCs, depending on the AM technique and feedstock. Levels of FeNO, IOS, and spirometry parameters were within clinical reference values for all AM operators. There was a difference in the relative abundance of saturated, notably dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine (PC16:0_16:0), and unsaturated lung surfactant lipids in exhaled particles between controls and AM operators.