Comparison of light and electron microscopy for defining occupational asbestos exposure in transbronchial lung biopsies

Our plain-English summary of Comparison of light and electron microscopy for defining occupational asbestos exposure in transbronchial lung biopsies, by R.F. Dodson, G.A. Hurst, M.G. Williams, et al (Chest, 1988).

The study

• Authors: R.F. Dodson, G.A. Hurst, M.G. Williams, C. Corn, S.D. Greenberg
• Journal: Chest
• Published: 1988;94(2):366-70
• Cited by: 10 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 000209).

Abstract

Since asbestos burden in the lung can very among areas, the usefulness of small tissue samples for identifying past occupational exposure is examined. Simulated transbronchial biopsy samples and open lung biopsy samples were collected from autopsy material from 12 former amosite asbestos workers and ten persons from the general population. Tissue evaluation included (1) paraffin embedment and light microscopy screening for fibrosis and ferruginous bodies, and (2) tissue digestion, which was analyzed by the combination of (A) light microscopy screening for ferruginous bodies and (B) electron microscopy (EM) screening for uncoated fibers. Using standard pathology techniques to classify the small samples was generally unsuccessful, the samples being too small or their size compounding other random sampling problems. The most reliable method of establishing which transbronchial biopsy tissue samples were from the occupationally exposed group occurred when light and EM analyses were used to evaluate digested tissue. The combined data from the EM analysis of two samples per subject indicated controls had two or fewer observed asbestos fibers, while the amosite asbestos workers had six or more fibers. This distinction was valid even in those who, 21 years before sampling, had worked for only a few weeks in the asbestos plant.

In plain English

Using autopsy lungs, the authors tested whether small samples like transbronchial (forceps) biopsies can show past occupational asbestos exposure. Tissue came from 12 former amosite asbestos workers, who had worked in a local East Texas asbestos plant for two weeks to 15.4 years, and ten controls with no known lung disease or occupational asbestos exposure. Simulated forceps biopsies and larger simulated open lung biopsies were examined as stained sections by light microscopy and, after the tissue was dissolved, for ferruginous bodies (light microscope) and uncoated fibers (electron microscope). Stained sections of forceps samples were frequently not useful: many had too little tissue to evaluate, and only four ferruginous bodies were seen, one each in four workers. In the dissolved forceps samples, ferruginous bodies were found in all but three workers and in no controls. By electron microscopy of two samples per person, controls had two or fewer asbestos fibers and workers six or more, even those who had worked only a few weeks 21 years earlier. The authors concluded that electron microscopy reliably separated occupationally from nonoccupationally exposed subjects.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Methods comparison study using simulated transbronchial (forceps) biopsies and simulated open lung biopsies taken from autopsy lung tissue
• Who was studied: Autopsy lung tissue from 12 former amosite asbestos workers and 10 control subjects with no known history of lung disease or occupational asbestos exposure. Both groups were from the nonurban East Texas area. Dates of the autopsies are not given.
• Exposure: Work in a local asbestos plant (amosite asbestos workers) for periods from two weeks to 15.4 years
• Main results:
  • Light microscopy of stained sections of the forceps biopsy tissue was frequently not useful in telling asbestos-exposed from unexposed persons.
  • Sections with too few alveoli for adequate evaluation occurred in 41 percent of the H&E and trichrome slides and in 46 percent of the Prussian blue slides.
  • Only four ferruginous bodies were seen in the forceps biopsy tissue sections from the asbestos workers, one each in four workers.
  • In the digested forceps biopsy samples, at least one ferruginous body was found in all but three of the asbestos workers and in none of the general-population controls.
  • Controls: 70 fibers were found by electron microscopy in the forceps biopsy digests, of which 65 were nonasbestos, four were amphiboles and one was chrysotile.
  • Asbestos workers: the forceps biopsy digests contained 2,242 fibers, of which 1,886 were amphiboles, 157 were chrysotile and 199 were nonasbestos.
  • Combining the electron microscopy counts from two samples per subject, control subjects had two or fewer asbestos fibers and the amosite asbestos workers had six or more. This held even for workers who had worked only a few weeks, 21 years before sampling.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that light microscopy of the small transbronchial biopsies without electron microscopy would have been of very limited value in separating occupationally from nonoccupationally exposed individuals, while the electron microscopy data placed subjects reliably into these categories.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Asbestos Exposure, Occupational Exposure, Biopsy, Autopsy, Amosite, Fibrosis, Ferruginous Bodies, Tissue Digestion.

Related studies

• Comparison of the results of asbestos fibre dust counts in lung tissue obtained by analytical electron microscopy and light microscopy — F.D. Pooley, D.L. Ranson (1986)
• A comparison of light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy results in the evaluation of the occupational exposure to airborne chrysotile fibres — A. Marconi, E. Menichini, et al. (1984)
• Determination of mineral fibre in human lung tissue by light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy — A.J. Rogers (1984)
• A technical comparison of evaluating asbestos concentration by phase-contrast microscopy (PCM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and analytical transmission electron microscopy (ATEM) as illustrated from data generated from a case report — R.F. Dodson, S.P. Hammar, et al. (2008)
• Lung dust content in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a study with scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive x ray analysis — E. Monsó, J.M. Tura, et al. (1991)
• Flagellate pigmentation from intrapleural bleomycin. A light microscopy and electron microscopy study — A.C. Fernandez-Obregon, K.P. Hogan, et al. (1985)

Browse more research in Chest, or return to medical research.