The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed a tremendous amount of strain on resources in the health care setting. One of the most pressing issues is the rapid depletion of personal protective equipment (PPE) used in the care of patients. This is a significant concern for health care workers' health and safety. Many entities have depleted or soon will exhaust their stockpile of PPE despite adopting PPE-sparing practices as the number of COVID-19 cases in the United States increases at an almost exponential rate and manufacturers struggle to keep up with the worldwide demand. This potential shortage is particularly concerning for commonly used N95 respirators and powered-air purifying respirators (PAPRs). Recently, the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 1 even temporarily suspended the requirement to perform annual fit testing of respirators to allow entities to conserve respirators and preserve them for patient care. These measures are unprecedented and highlight the urgent need for entities to develop solutions to proactively address what could be potentially a grave occupational health issue.At Duke University and Health System, we have evaluated and will begin using hydrogen peroxide vapor to decontaminate and reuse N95 respirators. In this communication, we briefly discuss the decontamination validation process and post-decontamination performance validation conducted at Duke. This validation, which is supported by previous laboratory testing, funded by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), demonstrated that N95 respirators still met performance requirements even after decontamination with hydrogen peroxide vapor in the laboratory setting for over 50 times. 2 While previous studies have shown the applicability of the hydrogen peroxide vapor process, we have also confirmed that the respirator still functions as designed, using our standardized human N95 fit testing methodology. We will now use this internally validated and Duke Institutional Biosafety Review Committee (IBRC)-approved laboratory decontamination process in the clinical setting to dramatically extend the life of our N95 respirators. We hope that sharing our processes through this brief communication can help other entities with access to hydrogen peroxide vapor to evaluate the potential applicability of this technology at their facility or partner with those who may already have this capability, including other private-sector life science organizations. Process/MethodWe, like others, have implemented many Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-approved N95 reuse practices, including employees reusing their own N95s for the duration of their shifts. However, this alone may not be adequate to meet our anticipated need with various centers reporting multiplefold higher use of PPE as their caseload increases. In the interest of our workforce safety, the goal was thus to extend the life of our existing supply.

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath originate from current or previous environmental exposures (exogenous compounds) and internal metabolic (anabolic and catabolic) production (endogenous compounds). The origins of certain VOCs in breath presumed to be endogenous have been proposed to be useful as preclinical biomarkers of various undiagnosed diseases including lung cancer, breast cancer, and cardio-pulmonary disease. The usual approach is to develop difference algorithms comparing VOC profiles from nominally healthy controls to cohorts of patients presenting with a documented disease, and then to apply the resulting rules to breath profiles of subjects with unknown disease status. This approach to diagnosis has a progression of sophistication; at the most rudimentary level, all measurable VOCs are included in the model. The next level corrects exhaled VOC concentrations for current inspired air concentrations. At the highest level, VOCs exhibiting discriminatory value also require a plausible biochemical pathway for their production before inclusion. Although these approaches have all shown some level of success, there is concern that pattern recognition is prone to error from environmental contamination and between-subject variance. In this paper, we explore the underlying assumptions for the interpretation and assignment of endogenous compounds with probative value for assessing changes. Specifically, we investigate the influence of previous exposures, elimination mechanisms and partitioning of exogenous compounds as confounders of true endogenous compounds. We provide specific examples based on a simple classical pharmacokinetic approach to identify potential misinterpretations of breath data and propose some remedies.

Turnout gear provides protection against dermal exposure to contaminants during firefighting; however, the level of protection is unknown. We explored the dermal contribution to the systemic dose of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and other aromatic hydrocarbons in firefighters during suppression and overhaul of controlled structure burns. The study was organized into two rounds, three controlled burns per round, and five firefighters per burn. The firefighters wore new or laundered turnout gear tested before each burn to ensure lack of PAH contamination. To ensure that any increase in systemic PAH levels after the burn was the result of dermal rather than inhalation exposure, the firefighters did not remove their self-contained breathing apparatus until overhaul was completed and they were >30 m upwind from the burn structure. Specimens were collected before and at intervals after the burn for biomarker analysis. Urine was analyzed for phenanthrene equivalents using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and a benzene metabolite (s-phenylmercapturic acid) using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry; both were adjusted by creatinine. Exhaled breath collected on thermal desorption tubes was analyzed for PAHs and other aromatic hydrocarbons using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. We collected personal air samples during the burn and skin wipe samples (corn oil medium) on several body sites before and after the burn. The air and wipe samples were analyzed for PAHs using a liquid chromatography with photodiode array detection. We explored possible changes in external exposures or biomarkers over time and the relationships between these variables using non-parametric sign tests and Spearman tests, respectively. We found significantly elevated (P < 0.05) post-exposure breath concentrations of benzene compared with pre-exposure concentrations for both rounds. We also found significantly elevated post-exposure levels of PAHs on the neck compared with pre-exposure levels for round 1. We found statistically significant positive correlations between external exposures (i.e. personal air concentrations of PAHs) and biomarkers (i.e. change in urinary PAH metabolite levels in round 1 and change in breath concentrations of benzene in round 2). The results suggest that firefighters wearing full protective ensembles absorbed combustion products into their bodies. The PAHs most likely entered firefighters’ bodies through their skin, with the neck being the primary site of exposure and absorption due to the lower level of dermal protection afforded by hoods. Aromatic hydrocarbons could have been absorbed dermally during firefighting or inhaled during the doffing of gear that was off-gassing contaminants.

No abstract