Phosgene-induced acute lung injury (ALI): differences from chlorine-induced ALI and attempts to translate toxicology to clinical medicine.

BACKGROUND

Phosgene (carbonyl dichloride) gas is an indispensable chemical inter-mediate used in numerous industrial processes. There is no clear consensus as to its time- and inhaled-dose-dependent etiopathologies and associated preventive or therapeutic treatment strategies.

METHODS

Cardiopulmonary function was examined in rats exposed by inhalation to the alveolar irritant phosgene or to the airway irritant chlorine during and following exposure. Terminal measurements focused on hematology, protein extravasation in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), and increased lung weight. Noninvasive diagnostic and prognostic endpoints in exhaled breath (carbon dioxide and nitric oxide) were used to detect the clinically occult stage of pulmonary edema.

RESULTS

The first event observed in rats following high but sublethal acute exposure to phosgene was the stimulation of alveolar nociceptive vagal receptors. This afferent stimulation resulted in dramatic changes in cardiopulmonary functions, ventilation: perfusion imbalances, and progressive pulmonary edema and phospholipoproteinosis. Hematology revealed hemoconcentration to be an early marker of pulmonary edema and fibrin as a discriminating endpoint that was positive for the airway irritant chlorine and negative for the alveolar irritant phosgene.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of each gas produced typical ALI/ARDS (acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome) characteristics. Phosgene-induced ALI showed evidence of persistent apnea periods, bradycardia, and shifts of vascular fluid from the peripheral to the pulmonary circulation. Carbon dioxide in expired gas was suggestive of increased ventilation dead space and appeared to be a harbinger of progressively developing lung edema. Treatment with the iNOS inhibitor aminoguanidine aerosol by inhalation reduced the severity of phosgene-induced ALI when applied at low dose-rates. Symptomatic treatment regimens were considered inferior to causal modes of treatment.