Effect of two different types of vacuum cleaners on airborne Fel d 1 levels

Does Air Filtration Work for Cat Allergen Exposure?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this review is to compress all important information and results of the research in reducing cat allergen exposure using air filtration. Fel d 1 is the major allergen responsible for IgE responses in 90 to 95% of patients with cat allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Reduction of cat allergen in indoor air with different air filtration systems and portable devices has been demonstrated in the majority of the studies. Recently, early and late asthmatic responses were significantly reduced using portable HEPA air cleaners in an environmental exposure chamber. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of airborne Fel d 1 air filtration targeting the most efficient devices in cat allergen reduction. Novel emerging HEPA filters are targeting reduction of cat indoor asthma trigger so patient can might benefit from efficient solution.

Do central vacuum cleaners produce less indoor airborne dust or airborne cat allergen, during and after vacuuming, compared with regular vacuum cleaners?

Vacuum cleaners with a central exhaust may lead to lower airborne dust and allergen concentrations compared with regular vacuum cleaners. In 12 houses, equipped with a central vacuum cleaning system, a standardized vacuum cleaning protocol was performed comparing airborne dust and allergen concentrations between the central system and a regular cleaner. Airborne dust concentrations during (104 vs. 95 microg/m(3)) and after vacuum cleaning (38 vs. 36 microg/m(3)) were not significantly different. In houses with a cat, Fel d 1 concentrations were also not significantly different either during (6.12 vs.5.91 ng/m(3)) and after (0.64 vs. 0.91 ng/m(3)) use of the vacuum cleaners. Airborne dust and Fel d 1 concentrations increased considerably during use of both vacuum cleaners. Compared with central vacuum cleaning systems, conventional modern vacuum cleaners do not cause higher airborne dust or cat allergen concentrations during and after use.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

This study shows that the amount of dust or cat allergen in the air during and after vacuum cleaning is similar when comparing a central vacuum cleaner with a regular vacuum cleaner. Therefore, allergen avoidance advice given to reduce exposure of allergic asthmatic patients to allergens, does not necessarily have to include switching to a central vacuum cleaner.

Study of the effects of vacuuming on the concentration of dust mite antigen and endotoxin

BACKGROUND

Dust mite antigens are major sources of allergens in house dust and together with endotoxin, a proinflammatory component of gram negative bacteria also found in house dust, are important causes of tissue injury involved in the pathogenesis and severity of allergic diseases, eg, asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of vacuuming in reducing the quantity of dust mite antigens, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Der p and Der p2) and endotoxin using a quantitative ELISA assay and to correlate results with those obtained using a qualitative rapid dipstick method for Der p2.

METHODS

Four specimens of house dust were collected using a Kirby Model G5 vacuum cleaner with a Micron Magic Filtration system from an approximately 54" x 18" standardized area of rug from each of 20 homes at 4 time intervals over a 6-week period, ie, a baseline specimen #1 at 0 week; specimen #2 at 1 week; specimen #3 at 5 weeks (1 month after specimen #2); specimen #4 at 6 weeks (1 week after specimen #3). Three intervals were compared, ie, period 1-2 (1 week), period 2-3 (1 month), and period 3 to 4 (1 week). The concentrations of Der p1 and Der p2 were determined in dust samples using a standard ELISA assay and the concentration of endotoxin was detected using a limulus amebocyte lysate assay. Concentrations of Der p2, determined by the standard ELISA assay, were compared to those in the same samples determined by a rapid dipstick method.

RESULTS

A wide range of values for total weight of unprocessed dust (0.3 to 59 g, X = 8.7) and finely sieved dust (0.1 to 19 g, X = 3) from all specimens were found. In finely sieved dust specimens the mean concentrations of Der p1, Der p2 and endotoxin were 775, 1310, and 3836 ng/g of dust, respectively. Following weekly vacuuming there was an increase in concentration of Der p1, Der p2, and endotoxin in 20%, 35%, and 63% of the houses, respectively, compared to in monthly vacuuming in which increases were seen in 65%, 50%, and 63% of the houses, respectively. In contrast, there was a decrease in concentration of Der p1, Der p2 and endotoxin with weekly vacuuming in 43%, 60%, and 37% of the houses respectively versus in monthly vacuuming in 15%, 35%, and 37% of the houses respectively. A correlation coefficient of 0.7 was found for the concentration of Der p2 in 37/40 samples tested detected using the ELISA method compared with rapid dipstick assay.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study support the effectiveness of vacuuming on the reduction of dust mite antigens (Der p1 and Der p2) ie, Der p2 > Der p1. This reduction was more pronounced with weekly compared with monthly vacuuming. No reduction in the concentration of endotoxin was found. A good correlation was found between results obtained by ELISA and rapid dipstick assay for Der p2.