The contribution of dental amalgam to urinary mercury excretion in children

James S Woods, Michael D Martin, Brian G Leroux, Timothy A DeRouen, Jorge G Leitão, Mario F Bernardo, Henrique S Luis, P Lynne Simmonds, John V Kushleika, Ying Huang, James S Woods, Michael D Martin, Brian G Leroux, Timothy A DeRouen, Jorge G Leitão, Mario F Bernardo, Henrique S Luis, P Lynne Simmonds, John V Kushleika, Ying Huang

Abstract

Background: Urinary mercury concentrations are widely used as a measure of mercury exposure from dental amalgam fillings. No studies have evaluated the relationship of these measures in a longitudinal context in children.

Objective: We evaluated urinary mercury in children 8-18 years of age in relation to number of amalgam surfaces and time since placement over a 7-year course of amalgam treatment.

Methods: Five hundred seven children, 8-10 years of age at baseline, participated in a clinical trial to evaluate the neurobehavioral effects of dental amalgam in children. Subjects were randomized to either dental amalgam or resin composite treatments. Urinary mercury and creatinine concentrations were measured at baseline and annually on all participants.

Results: Treatment groups were comparable in baseline urinary mercury concentration (approximately 1.5 microg/L). Mean urinary mercury concentrations in the amalgam group increased to a peak of approximately 3.2 microg/L at year 2 and then declined to baseline levels by year 7 of follow-up. There was a strong, positive association between urinary mercury and both number of amalgam surfaces and time since placement. Girls had significantly higher mean urinary mercury concentrations than boys throughout the course of amalgam treatment. There were no differences by race in urinary mercury concentration associated with amalgam exposure.

Conclusions: Urinary mercury concentrations are highly correlated with both number of amalgam fillings and time since placement in children. Girls excrete significantly higher concentrations of mercury in the urine than boys with comparable treatment, suggesting possible sex-related differences in mercury handling and susceptibility to mercury toxicity.

Keywords: amalgam; children; dental; mercury; urine.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Histograms of baseline urinary mercury concentrations in amalgam (A) and composite (B) treated groups. Heights of the bars represent the numbers of subjects with values within the indicated range. The distributions of baseline urinary mercury levels were similar in the two treatment groups.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean urinary mercury concentrations, unadjusted (A) and creatinine-adjusted (B), for the amalgam group and composite group. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals for the group means. Group differences were highly statistically significant (p < 0.001) for both measures at follow-up years 2 through 6. The group differences at year 7 were not significant for unadjusted mercury (p = 0.07) but significant for adjusted mercury (p = 0.007).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean urinary mercury concentrations for the amalgam group and composite group separately for male (A) and female (B) participants. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals for the group means. Differences between males and females in the amalgam group were statistically significant (p < 0.05) at all follow-up years except follow-up year 3. The sex comparisons were not altered significantly by adjustment for creatinine (results not shown).
Figure 4
Figure 4
The increase in urinary mercury concentration is influenced by both the amount and timing of amalgam treatment. Children in the amalgam group were categorized according to the number of amalgam surfaces placed at baseline—(A) 0–4; (B) 5–9; (C) > 9—and the number of additional amalgam surfaces placed in subsequent years. The values plotted are the differences between mean urinary mercury in a particular subgroup of amalgam-treated children compared with mean urinary mercury concentration in the composite group at each year.

References

    1. Akesson I, Schutz A, Attewell R, Skerfving S, Glantz P-O. Status of mercury and selenium in dental personnel: impact of amalgam work and own fillings. Arch Environ Health. 1991;46:102–109.
    1. Barregård L, Sällsten G, Schütz A, Attewell R, Skerfving S, Järvholm B. Kinetics of mercury in blood and urine after brief occupational exposure. Arch Environ Health. 1992;47:176–184.
    1. Begerow J, Zander D, Freier I, Dunemann L. Long-term mercury excretion in urine after removal of amalgam fillings. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1994;66:209–212.
    1. Bellinger DC, Trachtenberg T, Barregard L, Tavares M, Cernichiari E, Daniel D, et al. Neuropsychological and renal effects of dental amalgam in children: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006;295:1775–1783.
    1. Berglund A, Pohl L, Olsson S, Bergman M. Determination of the rate of release of intra-oral mercury vapor from amalgam. J Dent Res. 1988;67:1235–1242.
    1. Bowers MA, Aicher LD, Davis HA, Woods JS. Quantitative determination of porphyrins in rat and human urine and evaluation of urinary porphyrin profiles during mercury and lead exposures. J Lab Clin Med. 1992;120:272–281.
    1. Brent RL, Weitzman M. The current state of knowledge about the effects, risks, and science of children’s environmental exposures. Pediatrics. 2004;113:1158–1166.
    1. Brownawell AM, Berent S, Brent RL, Bruckner JV, Doull J, Gershwin EM, et al. The potential adverse health effects of dental amalgam. Toxicol Rev. 2005;24:1–10.
    1. Brune D. Mechanisms and kinetics of metal release from dental alloys. Int Endod J. 1988;21:135–142.
    1. Clarkson TW. Three modern faces of mercury. Environ Health Perspect. 2003;110:11–23.
    1. Clarkson TW, Friberg L, Hursh JB, Nylander M. The prediction of intake of mercury vapor from amalgams. In: Clarkson TW, Friberg L, Nordberg GF, Sager PR, editors. Biological Monitoring of Toxic Metals. New York: Plenum Press; 1988. pp. 247–264.
    1. Clarkson TW, Magos L. The toxicology of mercury and its chemical compounds. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2006;36:609–662.
    1. Counter SA, Buchanan LH. Mercury exposure in children: a review. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2004;198:229–230.
    1. Davidson PW, Myers GJ, Weiss B. Mercury exposure and child development outcomes. Pediatrics. 2004;113(suppl 4):1023–1029.
    1. DeRouen TA, Leroux BG, Martin MD, Townes BD, Woods JS, Leitão J, et al. Issues in the design and analysis of a randomized clinical trial to assess the safety of dental amalgam restorations in children. Contr Clin Trials. 2002;23:301–320.
    1. DeRouen TA, Martin MD, Leroux BG, Townes BD, Woods JS, Leitão J, et al. Neurobehavioral effects of dental amalgam in children. JAMA. 2006;295:1784–1792.
    1. Dye BA, Schober SE, Dillon CF, Jones RL, Fryar C, McDowell M, et al. Urinary mercury concentrations associated with dental restorations in adult women aged 16–49 years: United States, 1999–2000. Occup Environ Med. 2006;62:368–375.
    1. Echeverria D, Aposhian HV, Woods JS, Heyer NJ, Aposhian MM, Bittner AC, et al. Neurobehavioral effects from exposure to dental amalgam: new distinctions between recent exposure and Hg body burden. FASEB J. 1998;12:971–980.
    1. Evens CC, Martin MD, Woods JS, Soares HL, Bernardo M, Leitão J, et al. Examination of dietary methylmercury exposure in the Casa Pia study of the health effects of dental amalgams in children. J Toxicol Environ Health. 2001;64:521–530.
    1. Forfar JA, Arneil GC, editors. Textbook of Pediatrics. 3. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1984.
    1. Gay DD, Cox RD, Reinhart JW. Chewing releases mercury from fillings. Lancet. 1979;1:985–986.
    1. Gearhart JM, Clewell JH, III, Crump KS, Shipp AM, Silvers A. Pharmacokinetic dose estimates of mercury in children and dose-response curves of performance tests in a large epidemiological study. Water Air Soil Poll. 1995;80:49–58.
    1. Gimenez-Llort L, Ahlbom D, Daré E, Vahter M, Ogren S, Ceccatelli S. Prenatal exposure to methylmercury changes dopamine-modulated motor activity during early ontogeny: age and gender-dependent effects. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol. 2001;9:61–70.
    1. Goering PL, Galloway WD, Clarkson TW, Lorscheider FL, Berlin M, Rowland AS. Toxicity assessment of mercury vapor from dental amalgams. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1992;19:319–329.
    1. Grandjean P, Weihe P, White RF, Debes F. Cognitive performance of children preferentially exposed to “safe” levels of methylmercury. Environ Res. 1998;77:165–172.
    1. Halbach S, Clarkson TW. Enzymatic oxidation of mercury vapor by erythrocytes. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1978;523:522–531.
    1. Hultman P, Nielsen JB. The effect of dose, gender, and non-H-2 genes in murine mercury-induced autoimmunity. J Autoimmun. 2001;17:27–37.
    1. Khordi-Mood M, Sarraf-Shirazi A, Balali-Mood M. Urinary mercury excretion following amalgam filling in children. Clin Toxicol. 2001;39:701–705.
    1. Kingman A, Albertini T, Brown LJ. Mercury concentrations in urine and whole blood associated with amalgam exposure in a US military population. J Dent Res. 1998;77:461–467.
    1. Levy M, Schwartz S, Dijak M, Weber J-P, Tardif R, Rouah F. Childhood urine mercury excretion: dental amalgam and fish consumption as exposure factors. Environ Res. 2004;94:283–290.
    1. Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13–22.
    1. Mackert JR, Jr, Bergland A. Mercury exposure from dental amalgam fillings: absorbed dose and the potential for adverse health effects. Crit Rev Oral Med. 1997;8:410–436.
    1. Magos L, Halbach S, Clarkson TW. Role of catalase in the oxidation of mercury vapor. Biochem Pharmacol. 1978;27:1373–1377.
    1. Makre G, Balbus J, Parkin R. Children’s susceptibility to chemicals: a review by developmental stage. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1986;7:417–436.
    1. McKeown-Eyssen GE, Ruedy J, Neims A. Methyl mercury exposure in northern Quebec. II. Neurologic findings in children. Amer J Epidemiol. 1983;118:470–479.
    1. Pesch A, Wilhelm M, Rostek U, Schmitz N, Weishoff-Houben M, Ranft U, et al. Mercury concentrations in urine, scalp hair, and saliva in children from Germany. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol. 2002;12:252–258.
    1. Pingree SD, Simmonds PL, Rummel KT, Woods JS. Quantitative evaluation of urinary porphyrins as a measure of kidney mercury content and mercury body burden during prolonged methylmercury exposure in rats. Toxicol Sci. 2001a;61:234–240.
    1. Pingree SD, Simmonds PL, Woods JS. Effects of 2,3-dimercapto-1-propanesulfonic acid (DMPS) on tissue and urine mercury levels following prolonged methylmercury exposure in rats. Toxicol Sci. 2001b;61:224–233.
    1. Rossi AD, Ahlbom E, Ogren SO, Nicotera P, Ceccatelli S. Prenatal exposure to methylmercury alters locomotor activity of male but not female rats. Exp Brain Res. 1997;117:428–436.
    1. Skare I, Engqvist A. Urinary mercury clearance of dental personnel after a long-term intermission in occupational exposure. Swed Dent J. 1990;14:255–259.
    1. Skare I, Engqvist A. Human exposure to mercury and silver released from dental amalgam restorations. Arch Environ Health. 1994;49:384–394.
    1. Svare CW, Paterson LC, Reinhardt JW, Boyer DB, Frank CW, Gay DD, et al. The effect of dental amalgam on mercury levels in expired air. J Dent Res. 1981;60:1668–1671.
    1. Suzuki T, Hongo T, Abe T, Matsuo N, Inoue N. Urinary mercury levels in Japanese school children: influence of dental amalgam fillings and fish eating habits. Sci Total Environ. 1993;136:213–227.
    1. Thomas DJ, Fisher HL, Sumler MR, Mushak P, Hall ll. Sexual differences in the excretion of organic and inorganic mercury by methyl mercury-treated rats. Environ Res. 1987;43:203–216.
    1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Strategy for Research on Environmental Risks to Children. EPA/600/R-00/068. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 2000.
    1. Vahter M, Åkesson A, Lidén C, Seccatelli S, Berglund M. Gender differences in the disposition and toxicity of metals. Environ Res. 2007;104:85–95.
    1. Vimy MJ, Lorscheider FL. Intra-oral air mercury released from dental amalgam. J Dent Res. 1985;64:1069–1071.
    1. Woods JS. Porphyrin metabolism as indicator of metal exposure and toxicity: In: Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology: Toxicology of Metals—Biochemical Aspects (Goyer RA, Cherian MG, eds) Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 1995;115:19–52.
    1. Woods JS, Martin MD, Naleway CA, Echeverria D. Urinary porphyrin profiles as a biomarker of mercury exposure: studies in dentists with occupational exposure to mercury vapor. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1993;40:235–246.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren