Rotzetter Jérémy, Le Ngoc Dung, Leib Flurina L, Leib Stephen L, Gsell Monika, Feldmann Julia, Summermatter Kathrin, Grandgirard Denis
Applied Biosafety, Institute for Infectious Diseases, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Neuroinfection Laboratory Institute for Infectious Diseases, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Appl Biosaf. 2024 Dec 16;29(4):209-220. doi: 10.1089/apb.2023.0012. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Inactivation of infectious liquid waste can be performed by different means, including autoclaving or chemical inactivation. Autoclaving is most widely used, but cannot always be implemented, so that chemical inactivation is a possible alternative. However, its efficacy has to be proven by in-house validation. Here, we provide an easy-to-implement validation process adapted from existing standards.
The bactericidal activity of two commercially available disinfectants, containing glucoprotamine or peracetic acid, was tested on two gram-positive bacteria, methicillin-resistant (MRSA) and (SP). Quantitative suspension tests were adapted from the European standard EN 13727. Membrane filtration was used to remove any trace of the active antiseptic. The stability of working solutions and the effect of different organic loads were also assessed. Further, the aquatic toxicity of glucoprotamine was tested on the viability and behavior of zebrafish larvae.
Peracetic acid was highly efficient against both strains, even at a working concentration of 0.25% for 1 minute was also highly sensitive to glucoprotamine, whereas MRSA required either higher concentrations (1%) or longer exposure times (30 min) at lower concentrations. Further, the lethal dosis that kills 50% of the embryos (LD) for glucoprotamine was 3-3.5 mg/L using the zebrafish Embryo Acute Toxicity Test.
We could confirm the very high efficacy of glucoprotamine- and peracetic-based disinfectants to inactivate liquid waste containing gram-positive bacteria. Also considering aquatic toxicity, this methodology could help laboratories to establish validated procedures for chemical inactivation of infectious liquid wastes relevant to their institution, balancing efficacy, and environmental issues.
传染性液体废物的灭活可通过不同方法进行，包括高压灭菌或化学灭活。高压灭菌应用最为广泛，但并非总能实施，因此化学灭活是一种可行的替代方法。然而，其有效性必须通过内部验证来证明。在此，我们提供了一个根据现有标准改编的易于实施的验证过程。
对两种市售消毒剂（含葡糖鱼精蛋白或过氧乙酸）对两种革兰氏阳性菌（耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌（MRSA）和[此处原文缺失菌名]（SP））的杀菌活性进行了测试。定量悬浮试验改编自欧洲标准EN 13727。采用膜过滤去除活性防腐剂的任何痕迹。还评估了工作溶液的稳定性和不同有机负荷的影响。此外，对葡糖鱼精蛋白的水生毒性进行了斑马鱼幼体的活力和行为测试。
过氧乙酸对两种菌株都非常有效，即使在0.25%的工作浓度下作用1分钟也是如此。[此处原文缺失对哪种菌的描述]对葡糖鱼精蛋白也高度敏感，而MRSA则需要更高浓度（1%）或在较低浓度下更长的暴露时间（30分钟）。此外，使用斑马鱼胚胎急性毒性试验，葡糖鱼精蛋白杀死50%胚胎的致死剂量（LD）为3 - 3.5毫克/升。
我们可以确认基于葡糖鱼精蛋白和过氧乙酸的消毒剂在灭活含革兰氏阳性菌的液体废物方面具有非常高的有效性。同时考虑到水生毒性，这种方法可以帮助实验室建立与其机构相关的传染性液体废物化学灭活的验证程序，平衡有效性和环境问题。
