Mise à jour d'une déclaration précédente
No de la demande: 2007-5671
Numéro de référence du titulaire d'homologation: PROSAR Case 1-15077661
Nom du titulaire (nom légal complet, aucune abbréviation): Syngenta Crop Protection Canada, Inc.
Adresse: 140 Research Lane, Research Park
Ville: Guelph
État: Ontario
Pays: Canada
Code postal /Zip: N1G4Z3
Incident chez l'humain
Pays: CANADA
État: SASKATCHEWAN
ARLA No d'homologation 16370 ARLA No de la demande d'homologation EPA No d'homologation.
Nom du produit: Princep Nine-T Herbicide (Water Dispersible Granule)
ARLA No d'homologation ARLA No de la demande d'homologation EPA No d'homologation.
Nom du produit: Gramoxone
Oui
Inconnu
Site: Agricultural-Outdoor/Agricole-extérieur
Specify Type: Apple Orchard
Inconnu
Professionnel de la santé
Sexe: Femme
Âge: >19 <=64 yrs / >19 <=64 ans
Système
Unknown / Inconnu
Oui
Oui
12
Day(s) / Jour(s)
Professionnel
Application
Inconnu
Respiratoire
>2 hrs <=8 hrs / >2 h <=8 h
>3 days <=1 wk / >3 jours <=1 sem
Caller received voice mail about possible exposure. Calling to see if we can assist her. Assessment: - Yes we do. - Caller will gather information about incident - appears a woman working in an orchard. Was exposed to 2 chemicals. - Will call back with further information. Calling back with further details. She works at Poison Control Center and is reporting from a somewhat limited case synopsis. RWK PC Case # (NUMBER) History: 17.5 days ago (6/19/07) (age) female patient inhaled some of listed products in the course of work in an apple orchard. Details of exposure are otherwise not known by reporter (products' concentrations, duration of use, onset of symptoms relative to exposure were unanswerable questions at this time). She presented to HCF on 6/23/07 with some apparent respiratory distress, and pulse oximetry indicated 80 % O2 Sat on room air. Pt was started on O2 with resultant improvement in O2 sat values, and was admitted to HCF where CXR and pulmonary CT scans revealed conditions of pneumonitis, pulmonary edema, and also demonstrated pleural effusions, and pulmonary nodes. Pulmonary embolus was ruled out. On or about 6/27/07, patient developed a fever which was treated with antibiotic therapy. Duration of treatments not stipulated. Pt also developed a rash for which antihistamines and bronchodilators were prescribed and utilized. Pt was discharged on 7/3/07 with an order to return in 2 weeks for pulmonary assessment. ASSESS: Would be helpful to establish better product information. Also, would be helpful to have RFT's performed, if not already done. REC: Provided case & tele # if questions arise. Follow-Up Received Caller states that exposed individual works at a local orchard, and was hand spraying for 6 hours. Caller reports that exposed individual inhaled Gramoxone product for up to 6 hours due to windy conditions, and lack of respiratory protection. Exposed individual did not experience any dermal exposure or ingestion. Exposure occurred on 6-17-07 or 6-18-07. Exposed individual developed signs / symptoms post exposure, and was transported to emergency room via ambulance: Low oxygen saturation - 80% on room air, Oxygen saturation - 90% on oxygen (3 liters) ,Rash on arms and legs - responsive to diphenhydramine, Shortness-of-breath, Fever, Rigors, Fluid on lungs, Tachypnea Patient was not acutely toxic, but was diagnosed with pneumonitis and pulmonary edema. Admitted to hospital for 1 week (from 06/23/07 to discharge on 7/3/07). Received antibiotics, antihistamines, bronchodilators, oxygen, lasix, and intravenous fluids. Result of lung CT showed nodes, which will be further investigated on an outpatient basis. Caller states that patient¿¿¿s chest still did not feel "100%" upon discharge. Patient is scheduled for follow-up chest CT and pulmonary function tests.
Majeure
The Princep Nine T label recommends avoiding inhalation of dusts, vapours or spray mist. The Gramaxone label contains very strict recommendations regarding the maximum allowable concentration of Gramoxone in water, specific articles of personal protective clothing depending on the type of spray application equipment, restrictions on the type of spray application equipment that can be used (to ensure the particles of a respirable size are not produced). Paraquat is not generally inhaled into the lungs. Paraquat is non-volatile and formulations containing paraquat are not applied through spray equipment, which would generate a significant proportion of respirable spray droplets. Paraquat is applied with conventional hydraulic spray equipment. The inhalable fraction that is taken into the noise and the mouth during breathing is also too large to reach the alveolar region of the lung. This fraction, could, however, be swallowed and is therefore, a source of secondary oral ingestion. Mist blowers, which product large numbers of very fine droplets, are not recommended for spraying paraquat. The patient did not experience any kidney effect, exposure to paraquat is characterized by kidney effects that precede the lung effects.