| Literature DB >> 32645473 |
Gabriela Ibáñez-Cervantes1, Juan Carlos Bravata-Alcántara2, Alan Steve Nájera-Cortés2, Sergio Meneses-Cruz3, Laura Delgado-Balbuena1, Clemente Cruz-Cruz1, Emilio Mariano Durán-Manuel1, Monica Alethia Cureño-Díaz4, Erika Gómez-Zamora5, Sonia Chávez-Ocaña2, Oscar Sosa-Hernández6, Antonio Aguilar-Rojas7, Juan Manuel Bello-López8.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: One of the serious consequences of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is the shortage of protective equipment for health personnel. N95 masks are considered one of the essential protective equipment in the management of patients with COVID-19. The shortage of N95 masks implies potential health risks for health personnel and significant economic losses for the health institution. The objective of this work was to investigate the disinfection of N95 masks artificially contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 and ESKAPE bacteria by using hydrogen peroxide plasma.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Device reuse; Medical security; Protective equipment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32645473 PMCID: PMC7336929 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2020.06.216
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Infect Control ISSN: 0196-6553 Impact factor: 2.918
Virus and bacterial strains used in this study
| Virus o strain | Characteristics | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical isolate | ||
| Slime Producing, | Clinical isolate | |
| Clinical isolate |
Fig 1General strategy for artificial contamination of N95 masks with SARS-CoV-2 and ESKAPE bacteria (Acinetobacter baumannii and Staphylococcus aureus) for subsequent disinfection with hydrogen peroxide plasma. (A) Scheme of inoculation points, (B) Artificial contamination and inocula absorption, (C) Mask packaging, (D) Disinfection with hydrogen peroxide plasma, and (E) SARS-CoV-2 detection and ESKAPE bacteria culture “before and after” treatment with hydrogen peroxide plasma.
Results of detection of SARS-CoV-2 specimen and ESKAPE bacteria (Acinetobacter baumannii and Staphylococcus aureus) before and after disinfection of N95 masks artificially contaminated
| Virus/Strains tested | Concentrations tested | After disinfection N95 masks | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relative concentration | Positive control (Concentration in Ct) | Detection of SARS-Cov-2 | Bacterial death (%) | |
| SARS-CoV-2 specimen | Undiluted | 14.86 | Negative | NA |
| 1:10 | 18.07 | Negative | NA | |
| 1:100 | 21.10 | Negative | NA | |
| 1:1000 | 24.38 | Negative | NA | |
| 1:10000 | 27.87 | Negative | NA | |
| 102 | 86 | NA | 100 | |
| 103 | 880 | NA | 100 | |
| 104 | 9030 | NA | 100 | |
| 105 | 9.6 × 104 | NA | 100 | |
| 106 | 9.3 × 105 | NA | 100 | |
| 102 | 110 | NA | 100 | |
| 103 | 910 | NA | 100 | |
| 104 | 9600 | NA | 100 | |
| 105 | 9.7 × 104 | NA | 100 | |
| 106 | 9.8 × 105 | NA | 100 | |
By RT-PCR method.
Plating on TSA agar method.
Not applicable.
Fig 2Amplification curves by RT-PCR of SARS-CoV-2 in artificially contaminated N95 masks. (A) Control “not treated” with hydrogen peroxide plasma and (B) Problem “treated” with hydrogen peroxide plasma.