The findings of this study showed that the TWA concentrations of RCS for 98% of the workers were higher than the TLV-TWA (0.025 mg/m
3) recommended by ACGIH in 2017. These findings are similar to other studies in Iran and other countries (
19-
23). Golbabaei et al. (2005) conducted a study to assess occupational exposure to crystalline silica in cement manufacturing in Iran. The results showed that occupational exposure of workers to crystalline silica in 57% of cases exceeded the REL recommended by the NIOSH (0.05 mg/m
3) (
24). Chen et al. (2012) found that the mean concentration of respirable silica ranged from 0.12 to 0.3 mg/m
3 in the pottery industry in China (
25). The difference in RCS concentrations reported in these studies can be attributed to the type of industrial fields, the industry longevity, failure to repair and maintenance, the use of engineering control approaches, and cleaning mechanisms that are factors affecting the worker’s exposure to silica at the mentioned workplaces.
Our study established that the mean MDA and CAT serum levels were higher in the exposed group than in the unexposed group. According to recent findings, after arriving at the alveoli, silica is ingested by alveolar macrophages and releases inflammatory mediators. The activation of ROS can lead to oxidative stress, lipid peroxidation, and direct damage to the lung tissue and can lead to MDA production as one of the lipid peroxidation products (
26-
28). Therefore, the significant increase in MDA in this study could be due to the increased production of activated oxygen species due to exposure to silica. The presence of oxidative stress-causing agents including chemicals in the environment leads to the production of free radicals such as superoxide. Superoxide is transformed into hydrogen peroxide in the presence of a substrate such as superoxide dismutase; then, the catalase enzyme decomposes hydrogen peroxide into water and oxygen (
29). The increased catalase level in the exposed group in this study can be attributed to the increase in free radicals due to hydrogen peroxide that may cause oxidative stress.
We found no significant difference in the TAC levels between the two groups. It is important to consider that pollutants can indirectly affect TAC, including enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants (
30). Therefore, the reduced TAC levels may be due to reductions in the antioxidant capacity of the body after exposure to silica. Consistent with our study, Aydin et al. (2004) found that plasma MDA levels were determined to be much higher in cement-exposed workers (
26). In addition, Keshvari et al. (2015) showed significant increments in blood LPO levels and CAT activity and concomitantly, lower TAC levels were observed in ceramic-exposed workers than in the referent group (
31). The increases in MDA, LPO, and CAT levels in the above-mentioned studies can be attributed to the mentioned reasons. On the other hand, in the survey of the effects of occupational silica exposure on oxidative stress and immune system parameters in ceramic workers, data demonstrated a significant increase in the MDA levels and the activity of glutathione reductase (GR) and a significant decrease in the levels of total glutathione (GSH) and activities of CAT, superoxide dismutase (SOD), and glutathione peroxidase (GPx) in all workers (
8). Meanwhile, Abdelatty et al. (2014) reported a reduction in the activities of SOD, CAT, and GSH in silica-exposed participants (
8). Reductions in the CAT levels in these studies may be due to the fact that chronic exposure to contaminants can have a negative effect on CAT by reducing this enzyme instead of its increase. In another study, silicosis was associated with increased plasma MDA and reduced erythrocyte glutathione levels, providing an oxidative link (
32). Differences in some values obtained from various studies may be due to the fact that the studies focused on various industries and their workers were exposed to different types and sizes of silica particles. According to studies, features such as size, surface area, and surface properties play important roles in inducing toxicity (
33). Moreover, in the present study, the oxidative stress biomarker levels were different between workers from various industries. It seems differences in the body’s defense system, weather conditions, and diets between different countries can be another reason for the difference in oxidative stress biomarker levels in the mentioned studies.
In the present study, a significant difference was found between smokers and nonsmokers in the TAC level in the unexposed group, the MDA level in the exposed group, and the MDA level in total subjects. Anlar et al. (2017) showed no significant correlation between GSH levels, CAT, and SOD, and smoking in ceramic workers (
8). On the other hand, Nielsen et al. (1997) showed daily smokers had a slightly higher average concentration of plasma MDA than nonsmokers (P = 0.05) and plasma MDA was correlated with daily exposure to the cigarette smoke (r = 0.162; P = 0.03) (
34). As can be seen, the results are different in various studies. It is important to consider, although non-smokers do not smoke, they may be exposed to pollution caused by smokers. Also, It should be mentioned that, when smokers consume cigarettes together with other smokers, it may expose them to pollution levels more than when they consume cigarettes alone. The reason for this discrepancy in the results of different studies can be attributed to the uncontrolled conditions. We need more studies to examine the simultaneous effects of smoking and exposure to RCS on oxidative stress biomarker levels in workers.
The results of the present study also indicated no significant relationship of the age and duration of working with serum MDA, CAT, and TAC levels in workers exposed to RCS compared to the unexposed group. Kamal et al. (1989) reported that neither age nor the duration of exposure was related to the MDA levels among workers exposed to silica dust (
35). Furthermore, in the study of ceramic workers, there was no significant correlation between GSH levels, activities of GR, CAT, and SOD, and age and duration of working (
8). As can be seen, the results of other studies confirm our results.
Many attempts have been made to determine the relationship between crystalline silica exposure and oxidative stress levels to select an appropriate biomarker in occupational exposures. Although, in the present study, MDA and CAT levels were higher in the exposed group than in the unexposed group, no significant relationship was observed between silica exposure and oxidative stress in both groups. The present finding is in line with Orman et al. (2005) that showed no significant relationship between crystalline silica concentration and plasma MDA levels in spite of a positive correlation between the variables (r = 0.305, P > 0.05) (
32). Contrary, a study performed by Parsaseresht et al. (2017) in sand washing workers demonstrated a positive correlation between the exposure of workers to silica and serum MDA in the exposed group (P < 0.0001, r = 0.881) (
36). Therefore, according to the literature, the reason for discrepancy may be attributed primarily to the determination of RCS just in one day without considering the variations in workload, engineering control performance, and the use personal protective equipment in different days. In some aspects, measuring exposure to RCS in one day as a short survey cannot represent oxidative stress occurring over a long time. This deficiency is the most important limitation of the present study and some other studies, which may lead to discrepancy in the results of similar studies.
5.1. Conclusions
The results of this study showed despite a significant difference in the oxidative stress biomarkers between the exposed and unexposed groups and a significant difference in the levels of biomarkers between the workers of various industries, there was no significant relationship between the levels of oxidative stress biomarkers and the mean exposure to silica. Therefore, according to the results, it is not possible to claim that oxidative stress biomarkers are appropriate biological indices for the monitoring of silica exposure in occupational settings. Thus, this hypothesis still requires a comprehensive study of other aspects in this research field.