| Literature DB >> 27845748 |
Shih-Cheng Hu1, Angus Shiue2, Han-Yang Liu3, Rong-Ben Chiu4.
Abstract
There is worldwide concern with regard to the adverse effects of drug usage. However, contaminants can gain entry into a drug manufacturing process stream from several sources such as personnel, poor facility design, incoming ventilation air, machinery and other equipment for production, etc. In this validation study, we aimed to determine the impact and evaluate the contamination control in the preparation areas of the rapid transfer port (RTP) chamber during the pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. The RTP chamber is normally tested for airflow velocity, particle counts, pressure decay of leakage, and sterility. The air flow balance of the RTP chamber is affected by the airflow quantity and the height above the platform. It is relatively easy to evaluate the RTP chamber's leakage by the pressure decay, where the system is charged with the air, closed, and the decay of pressure is measured by the time period. We conducted the determination of a vaporized H₂O₂ of a sufficient concentration to complete decontamination. The performance of the RTP chamber will improve safety and can be completely tested at an ISO Class 5 environment.Entities:
Keywords: airflow pattern; cleanroom; contamination; particle image velocimetry; rapid transfer port
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27845748 PMCID: PMC5129339 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13111129
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Rapid Transfer Port Chamber (Air System Enterprise Co., Ltd., Taoyuan, Taiwan; Self-Fabricated) (a) Schematic; (b) Material transfer function; (c) Air distribution.
Figure 2Location of the measuring points during airflow velocity test.
Figure 3Location of the measuring points during particle measurements.
Figure 4Process Flow for RTP Decontamination.
Figure 5Airflow velocities at different airflow quantity.
Measured concentrations of particles of various sizes at the measuring points given in Figure 3.
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 456 | 6634 | 1427 | 301 | 956 |
| 0.5 µm | 33 | 475 | 96 | 26 | 76 |
| 1 µm | 9 | 158 | 38 | 4 | 14 |
| 3 µm | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 5 µm | 1 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 436 | 3035 | 2673 | 533 | 393 |
| 0.5 µm | 29 | 197 | 178 | 37 | 30 |
| 1 µm | 8 | 76 | 66 | 10 | 6 |
| 3 µm | 1 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| 5 µm | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 1165 | 11,781 | 937 | 802 | 520 |
| 0.5 µm | 76 | 854 | 59 | 54 | 34 |
| 1 µm | 19 | 294 | 20 | 18 | 8 |
| 3 µm | 0 | 23 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 5 µm | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 88 | 30,766 | 27,221 | 2488 | 0 |
| 0.5 µm | 5 | 2387 | 2103 | 205 | 0 |
| 1 µm | 3 | 764 | 705 | 46 | 0 |
| 3 µm | 0 | 42 | 50 | 0 | 0 |
| 5 µm | 0 | 20 | 24 | 2 | 0 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 1772 | 38,530 | 78,428 | 1712 | 0 |
| 0.5 µm | 130 | 2941 | 5473 | 115 | 0 |
| 1 µm | 38 | 1050 | 1665 | 30 | 0 |
| 3 µm | 6 | 100 | 145 | 3 | 0 |
| 5 µm | 2 | 50 | 75 | 2 | 0 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 7642 | 7937 | 124,631 | 665 | 84 |
| 0.5 µm | 530 | 575 | 8763 | 50 | 10 |
| 1 µm | 148 | 172 | 2566 | 16 | 2 |
| 3 µm | 11 | 7 | 195 | 1 | 0 |
| 5 µm | 2 | 12 | 74 | 0 | 0 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 45,210 | 3492 | 4218 | 5322 | 1 |
| 0.5 µm | 3432 | 265 | 295 | 414 | 0 |
| 1 µm | 1092 | 84 | 88 | 96 | 0 |
| 3 µm | 74 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 0 |
| 5 µm | 42 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 |
| 10 µm | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 1971 | 33,288 | 18,861 | 43,865 | 1 |
| 0.5 µm | 159 | 2513 | 1376 | 3361 | 0 |
| 1 µm | 42 | 851 | 370 | 1076 | 0 |
| 3 µm | 4 | 57 | 26 | 76 | 0 |
| 5 µm | 1 | 32 | 13 | 36 | 0 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Measuring points | A1 | B1 | A2 | B2 | M |
| 0.3 µm | 2034 | 89,337 | 15,599 | 4054 | 1 |
| 0.5 µm | 120 | 6895 | 1123 | 262 | 0 |
| 1 µm | 40 | 2174 | 341 | 79 | 0 |
| 3 µm | 6 | 172 | 24 | 3 | 0 |
| 5 µm | 2 | 82 | 10 | 2 | 0 |
| 10 µm | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Figure 6Pressure (P) versus time (t).
Correlations of pressure (P) vs. time (t).
| Pressure ( | ||
|---|---|---|
| 45 | 7.2 | |
| 30 | 5.6 | |
| 15 | 2.2 |
Figure 7Survivors vs. VPHP (Vaporized Hydrogen Peroxide) Concentration.
Survivors vs. Total Concentration of H2O2.
| Total Concentration of Sterilant | 700 ppm | 850 ppm | 1000 ppm |
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive BIs/Total BIs | 0/120 | 120/120 | 0/120 |