| Literature DB >> 29088277 |
Craig Meyers1, Janice Milici1, Richard Robison2.
Abstract
Endocavitary ultrasound probes are part of a commonly used procedure in the clinical arena. The cavities examined, vaginal canal and cervix, anal canal, and oral cavity are all areas commonly infected with the human papillomavirus (HPV), thus making them susceptible to contamination by HPV. It has been demonstrated that these probes can remain contaminated with high-risk HPV even when approved disinfection protocols have been performed. we have previously shown that HPV is resistant to some high-level disinfectant (HLD). In our present study we analyzed efficacy of using high-level ultra-violet C (UVC) radiation against HPV16 and HPV18 using a hard-surface carrier test. Stocks of infectious authentic HPV16 and HPV18 virions were dried onto carriers with a 5% (v/v) protein soil or 4ppm hard water. Efficacy testing were performed with the automated device, Antigermix S1 device (UVC radiation at 253.7nm) and 0.55% OPA in quadruplicate with matched input, neutralization, and cytotoxicity controls. Hypochlorite was included as a positive control for viral deactivation. Infectivity was determined by the abundance (qRT-PCR) of the spliced E1^E4 transcript in infected recipient cells. The automated Antigermix S1 device showed excellent efficacy against HPV16 and HPV18 whereas OPA showed minimal efficacy. While HPV is highly resistant to OPA, high-level UVC radiation offers an effective disinfection practice for ultrasound probes. Our results suggest that healthcare facilities using endocavitary ultrasound probes need to strongly consider disinfection methods that are effective against HPV.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29088277 PMCID: PMC5663507 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187377
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Average Ct values obtained in this study.
| HPV16 | HPV18 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample ID | Ct Value (Avg) | % Error | Ct Value (Avg) | % Error |
| Virus-Dried on carrier and recovered (No disinfectant, No Antigermix S1 device) | 26.89 | 0.030 | 24.83 | 0.079 |
| 5% BSA + Virus (Antigermix S1 device) | 41.78 | 0.216 | 41.25 | 0.245 |
| H2O + 4ppm CaCO3 + Virus (Antigermix S1 device) | 41.06 | 0.166 | 41.74 | 0.130 |
| OPA 0.55% + Virus | 28.51 | 0.174 | 26.96 | 0.107 |
| Hyperchlorite 0.87% + Virus | 41.94 | 0.024 | 41,94 | 0.024 |
| Virus Infection Only | 27.08 | 0.042 | 24.60 | 0.072 |
Fig 1Differing efficacy profiles of disinfectants against HPV.
HPV16 (A) or HPV18 (B) virions were subjected to hard surface carrier tests based on the ASTM E1053-11 standard test method against the disinfectants indicated. Virus films were dried onto 50mm diameter ABS carriers in the presence of a 5% fetal bovine serum (soil) and 4ppm CaCO3 (hard water) before being disinfected according to the disinfectant or device manufacturer’s instructions. Viral films were assayed for infectivity using a quantitative RT-PCR based method detecting the spliced E1^E4 transcript in infected recipient cells. Post-disinfection infectivity was compared to input to determine log10 reductions. Each efficacy test was conducted in quadruplicate and was paired with a matched neutralization control. Data is expressed as an average of n = 3; error bars indicate standard deviation.