Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T16:36:47.705Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Black Box Oxidizers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2017

Günter Kampf
Günter Kampf*
Affiliation:
University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
*
Address correspondence to Günter Kampf, MD, University Medicine Greifswald, Institute for Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Walter-Rathenau-Straße 49 A, 17475 Greifswald, Germany (guenter.kampf@uni-greifswald.de).
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Letters to the Editor
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 38 , Issue 11 , November 2017 , pp. 1387 - 1388
Copyright
© 2017 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved 

To the Editor—Burgess et alReference Burgess, Margolis, Gibbs, Duarte and Jackson 1 describe important findings on how to effectively kill glutaraldehyde-resistant mycobacterial strains. Based on the data described, oxidizing agents seem to be effective against them in short exposure times at elevated temperatures, similar to the results reported by other authors.Reference Lynam, Babb and Fraise 2 – Reference Griffiths, Babb and Fraise 4 While the preparation of the aldehydes is described in detail (ie, final concentration of the active ingredient), this important piece of information is completely missing for all 3 Steris products based on peracetic acid or hydrogen peroxide. Minimum effective concentration (MEC) values are described for the aldehyde-based products, but no minimal regrowth concentration (MRC) values are provided for the oxidizers. Mentioning only the name of a product is not sufficient for the scientific community; readers may also want to understand how exactly the solutions were prepared (especially when at least 1 product seems to be a powder or when products consist of more than 1 component). Readers may also want to see the final concentration of each active ingredient for all 3 products (eg, peracetic acid and hydrogen peroxide). Only these details will allow us to critically evaluate the effectiveness of the biocidal agents described in the study.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Financial support: No financial support was provided relevant to this article.

Potential conflicts of interest: The author has worked for Bode Chemie GmbH, Hamburg, Germany.

References

REFERENCES

1. Burgess, W, Margolis, A, Gibbs, S, Duarte, RS, Jackson, M. Disinfectant susceptibility profiling of glutaraldehyde-resistant nontuberculous Mycobacteria. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:784–791.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Lynam, PA, Babb, JR, Fraise, AP. Comparison of the mycobactericidal activity of 2% alkaline glutaraldehyde and ‘Nu-Cidex’ (0.35% peracetic acid). J Hosp Infect 1995;30:237–240.Google Scholar
3. Stanley, PM. Efficacy of peroxygen compounds against glutaraldehyde-resistant mycobacteria. Am J Infect Control 1999;27:339–343.Google Scholar
4. Griffiths, PA, Babb, JR, Fraise, AP. Mycobactericidal activity of selected disinfectants using a quantitative suspension test. J Hosp Infect 1999;41:111–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed