Smachlo Julia P, Hart Marcia L, Evans Michael D, Kick Brenda L
1Research Animal Resources, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
2Scientific Affairs, IDEXX BioAnalytics, Columbia, Missouri; and.
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2024 Nov 1;63(6):644-650. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-24-038.
Disinfectant application to gloved hands before handling SPF mice is standard practice to minimize transmission of pathogens and microbial contamination between cages. The risk of contamination with murine pathogens on gloves as well as the efficacy of disinfectant application for this step is largely unknown. This study aimed to determine if murine norovirus (MNV), Helicobacter spp., and Rodentibacter spp. are detectable on gloved hands and, if they are, to evaluate how effective the application of a hydrogen peroxide-based disinfectant (Rescue) or 70% ethanol is in reducing the transfer of these pathogens while handling multiple cages of mice. Mice with natural infections of these pathogens were handled without the application of any disinfectant and the gloves were swabbed for PCR testing. All pathogens were detected via PCR with Helicobacter spp. the most frequently transferred in 83% of the cages handled. The mice were then divided into 4 treatment groups based on the product applied to gloves before handling: Rescue, 70% ethanol, sterile water, and no product. Mice in each cage were briefly handled, and the gloves were swabbed with ATP swabs after each cage and swabs for PCR testing after handling 4 and 9 cages, consecutively. All pathogens were detected via PCR in all treatment groups, and neither Rescue nor 70% ethanol was superior to water or no product in reducing contamination. Rescue and 70% ethanol were effective in maintaining lower levels of organic microbial contamination than water and no product for consecutive handling of up to 3 and 4 cages of mice, respectively. This study indicates that exposure to MNV, Helicobacter spp., and Rodentibacter spp. from handling mice is a risk and the application of Rescue or 70% ethanol is not completely effective in eliminating transfer of these pathogens.
在处理无特定病原体(SPF)小鼠之前,对手套进行消毒剂处理是一种标准做法,目的是尽量减少病原体在笼子间的传播和微生物污染。手套上沾染鼠类病原体的风险以及此步骤中消毒剂处理的效果在很大程度上尚不清楚。本研究旨在确定手套上是否能检测到鼠诺如病毒(MNV)、幽门螺杆菌属和啮齿杆菌属,如果能检测到,评估基于过氧化氢的消毒剂(Rescue)或70%乙醇在处理多笼小鼠时减少这些病原体传播的效果如何。对自然感染这些病原体的小鼠进行处理时不使用任何消毒剂,然后对手套进行拭子采样用于PCR检测。通过PCR检测到了所有病原体,其中幽门螺杆菌属在83%的处理笼子中转移最为频繁。然后根据处理前涂在手套上的产品将小鼠分为4个处理组:Rescue、70%乙醇、无菌水和不使用任何产品。每个笼子里的小鼠被短暂处理,每处理一个笼子后用ATP拭子对手套进行擦拭,在连续处理4个和9个笼子后再对手套拭子进行PCR检测。在所有处理组中均通过PCR检测到了所有病原体,在减少污染方面,Rescue和70%乙醇都不比水或不使用任何产品更有优势。在连续处理多达3笼和4笼小鼠时,Rescue和70%乙醇分别比水和不使用任何产品在维持较低水平的有机微生物污染方面更有效。这项研究表明,处理小鼠时接触MNV、幽门螺杆菌属和啮齿杆菌属存在风险,并且使用Rescue或70%乙醇并不能完全有效地消除这些病原体的传播。