Silicosis and the Quartz Industry: A New Chapter or a Temporary Fix?

In September 2025, Business of Home published a sobering look at the artificial stone industry’s reckoning with accelerated silicosis—a deadly lung disease caused by inhaling nano-sized particles of crystalline silica and other toxins in traditional artificial stone. The article, “Is low-silica stone the path forward for the quartz industry?” spotlights the aftermath of a landmark $52 million verdict awarded to Gustavo Reyes Gonzalez, a 34-year-old artificial stone fabricator who required a double lung transplant after years of exposure to toxic crystalline silica and other toxins in artificial stone.

A Shift in Materials—But Is It Enough?

Following the Reyes Gonzalez case and Australia’s nationwide ban on artificial stone, major manufacturers like Caesarstone and Cosentino have introduced “low-“ and so-called “zero-silica” alternatives. According to their advertising, Caesarstone’s new “Icon” line contains less than 1% crystalline silica, while Cosentino’s Q0 surface boasts recycled content and claimed minimal silica levels.

As of this week, California’s Department of Public Health has recorded 391 silicosis cases and 22 deaths linked to artificial stone in California alone. The median age of diagnosis is just 46. These are not isolated incidents—they are a public health crisis.

Lung-Sparing Surgery Survival in Mesothelioma

History of silicosis in Egyptian workers

The History of Silicosis: From Ancient Stonecutters to the Modern Artificial Stone Crisis

February 18, 2026

Court Recommendation Allows Key Expert Testimony in Johnson & Johnson Talc Litigation

January 30, 2026

February 6, 2026

Background: Mesothelioma Disease Characteristics

Mesothelioma typically develops decades after asbestos exposure. Once symptoms, such as shortness of breath, chest pain, or abdominal swelling, begin the disease can progress rapidly. Treatment options remain limited, and even modern chemotherapy and immunotherapy usually provide survival measured in months rather than years. Surgery can play a role for some patients, but in rare cases where mesothelioma involves both the chest cavity and the abdomen, doctors have historically had little guidance on whether aggressive surgical treatment could truly improve outcomes.

Study Design and Surgical Approaches

The researchers set out to study this question. Out of 440 mesothelioma patients evaluated over a seven-year period, 14 were healthy enough to undergo a two-stage operation: one surgery for the chest and one for the abdomen.

Chest Procedures Compared

In the chest, surgeons used two different procedures:

Extended pleurectomy and decortication (ePD) aims to remove all visible cancer while preserving the lung.
Extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) removes the tumor requiring removal of the entire lung on the affected side.

Each patient in the study underwent abdominal surgery as well, usually combined with heated chemotherapy.

Key Findings and Survival Outcomes

Despite the small number of patients, the results revealed a pattern. Those who underwent the lung-sparing operation (ePD) lived longer than those who had their lung removed.

Median survival after ePD: 58.2 months, nearly five years
Median survival after EPP: 13.5 months

Across the entire 14-patient group, regardless of procedure, one in five patients were still alive five years after both surgeries.

While this rate is higher than typically seen in mesothelioma, the strongest outcomes were observed in the group whose lungs were preserved

Why Lung‑Sparing Surgery May Be Superior

The study offers clues about why lung-sparing surgery might lead to better outcomes. Researchers observed that patients living with only one lung after EPP struggled more during recovery from the second operation, particularly because of the intense fluid shifts and physiological stress associated with abdominal surgery and chemotherapy.

Two patients in the EPP group died within 90 days of their abdominal operation, while no early deaths occurred among those who had ePD. These findings align with a broader shift already underway in mesothelioma treatment: a move away from EPP and toward lung-preserving approaches whenever possible

Implications for Treatment

Although this study involved only a small number of patients, the findings suggest that long-term survival may still be possible in carefully selected cases when mesothelioma has spread to both the chest and abdomen. The results also indicate that lung-sparing surgery (ePD) may offer an advantage over more extensive lung-removing procedures when surgeons pursue aggressive cytoreductive treatment for bicavitary disease

Practical Takeaways for Patients and Families

Taken together, the study highlights two practical takeaways for patients and families:

The Importance of Specialized Care

First, treatment at a specialized center with deep experience in mesothelioma can be especially important for complex or advanced disease patterns.

Surgical Approach Matters

Second, the specific surgical approach matters. Preserving the lung, when medically appropriate, may improve recovery and offer a better chance at long-term survival

Contact Brayton Purcell LLP

If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with mesothelioma after asbestos exposure, it is important to understand both your medical and legal options. Brayton Purcell LLP has spent decades standing up for workers and families harmed by negligent asbestos exposure.

Call (800) 361-2417 or contact us online for a free consultation.

FAQs About the Ripley et al. Mesothelioma Study

1What makes the Baylor College of Medicine by Ripley, et al. study unique?

This study focuses on the rarest and most complex form of mesothelioma—disease affecting both the chest and abdomen—and evaluates outcomes after a two stage surgical approach, offering insights that have historically been lacking.

2Why does preserving the lung improve outcomes?

The study suggests that patients who retain both lungs are better able to withstand the second surgery and the physiological stress of abdominal chemotherapy, contributing to longer survival.

3Does the Baylor College of Medicine by Ripley, et al. study imply that ePD should replace EPP?

Not universally. Patient selection is critical. However, when both options are viable, this study supports choosing lung sparing surgery due to improved survival and fewer early postoperative deaths.