GMS Hygiene and Infection Control (Jan 2024)

Evaluation of a microscale quantitative suspension test to determine the bactericidal and yeasticidal activity of glutaral – one step to improve sustainability in disinfectant testing

  • Gebel, Jürgen,
  • Rausch, Marvin,
  • Bienentreu, Katja,
  • Droop, Felix,
  • Eggers, Maren,
  • Gebel, Lea,
  • Gemein, Stefanie,
  • Hornei, Britt,
  • Ilschner, Carola,
  • Jacobshagen, Anja,
  • Kampf, Günter,
  • Papan, Cihan,
  • Roesch, Kira,
  • Schmitz, Luisa,
  • Suchomel, Miranda,
  • Vossebein, Lutz,
  • Mutters, Nico T.,
  • Exner, Martin

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3205/dgkh000458
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19
p. Doc03

Abstract

Read online

Aims: To evaluate a newly developed microscale quantitative suspension test compared to the existing standard suspension test using determination of the bactericidal and yeasticidal activity of glutaral as one step to improve the sustainability of disinfectant testing.Methods: The testing principles of the quantitative suspension test according to VAH method 9 (comparable to EN 13727) was used as a standard suspension test using 8.0 mL product test solution, 1.0 mL organic load and 1.0 mL test suspension. In addition, a micro-scale suspension test was performed in 96-well plates with 160 µL product test solution, 20 µL organic load and 20 µL test suspension. ATCC 6538, ATCC 15442 and ATCC 10231 were test organisms. Glutaral was tested at concentrations of 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.2% and 0.3% with exposure times of 1, 5 and 15 min. Polysorbate 80 (30 g/L), lecithin (9 g/L), L-histidine (1 g/L) and glycine (1/L) were used as validated neutralizers. After serial dilution of the disinfectant-neutralizer-mixture, plates were incubated for 48 h at 36°C (bacteria) or 72 hours at 30°C () and colony forming units (cfu) counted. The lg reduction was calculated as the difference between the results of the water control and the disinfectant at the end of the exposure time. All experiments were done in triplicate under clean conditions. Means of lg reduction were compared with the unpaired test, p<0.05 was considered to be significant.Results: Sufficient bactericidal activity according the VAH test requirements of at least 5 lg was found with both methods in 16 data sets of 24 data sets in total, and insufficient bactericidal activity of less than 5 lg was found with both methods in 7 data sets. In one data set, the mean lg reduction was above 5 lg with the microscale method and g with the VAH method, with no significant difference between the data sets (p=0.3096; 0.2% glutaral, 1 min, ). A sufficient yeasticidal activity of at least 4 lg was found with both methods in one data set, an insufficient yeasticidal activity of less than 4 lg was found with both methods in 8 data sets. With one exception, no significant differences were detected between the two methods below the efficacy threshold.Conclusions: The microscale quantitative suspension test proved to provide results similar to those of VAH method 9 when the bactericidal and yeasticidal activity of glutaralwas evaluated, with 32 out of 33 evaluations yielding consistent results in terms of efficacy. Its suitability should be confirmed with additional bacterial species, additional biocidal active substances and in other laboratories.

Keywords