Novel long-lasting impregnation technique transferred from clothing to bednets: extended efficacy and residual activity of different pyrethroids against Aedes aegypti as shown by EN ISO 6330-standardized machine laundering

Faulde, Michael; Albiez, Gunther; Nehring, Oliver

doi:10.1007/s00436-011-2769-6

Cited by 19 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The ISO 6330∶2000 machine washing procedure that is considered to be the more stringent [27] (European standard for domestic washing procedure for textiles testing), seems to have less impact compared to the laboratory washing procedure which is considered as a hand simulation washing procedure [41]. So applying the ISO 6330∶2000 machine washing with the IEC A* detergent to the nets underestimates the loss of active ingredient due to washes.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Laboratory Standard Washing Using CIPAC Washing Agent and the Domestic Washing on Three Recommended Types of Long-Lasting Insecticidal Mosquito Nets

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOne of the best ways to prevent malaria is the use of insecticide-treated bed nets. Manufacturers pursue easier, safer and more efficient nets. Hence, many studies on the efficacy and wash resistance using World Health Organization standards have been reported. The commonly used detergent is “Savon de Marseille”, because it closely resembles actually used soaps. At the 54th Collaborative International Pesticides Analytical Council (CIPAC) Technical Meeting in 2010, it was suggested to replace it by a standardized “CIPAC washing agent”. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference between a laboratory hand washing simulation using the CIPAC washing agent (method-1) and a domestic washing (method-2) on different bed nets, as well as the effect of the drying process on the release of active ingredient.MethodsInterceptor®, Permanet®2.0 and Netprotect® nets were used in three treatments, each repeated 20 times. The first treatment included method-1 washing and indoor drying. The second treatment included method-2 washing and indoor drying. The third treatment used method-2 washing and UV-drying. The residual insecticide contents were determined using gas chromatography.ResultsThe washing procedure and the number of washes have a significant effect on the release of active ingredient. Statistically, the two washing methods have the same effect on removing the active ingredient from the Interceptor® and Permanet®2.0 net, but a significantly different influence on the Netprotect® nets. The drying process has no significant effect on the insecticide.ConclusionBoth washing procedures affected the amount of insecticide remaining on nets independently of the impregnation technology. The active ingredient decreases with the number of washing cycles following an exponential or logarithmic model for coated nets. The laboratory hand washing simulation had more impact on the decrease of active ingredient content of the Netprotect® nets. All net types seemed to be effectively protected against UV-light.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Laboratory Standard Washing Using CIPAC Washing Agent and the Domestic Washing on Three Recommended Types of Long-Lasting Insecticidal Mosquito Nets

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Permethrin or etofenprox did not enhance the spatial repellency as well as landing, probing and/or biting protection efficacy of DEET and IR3535 in combined LLIRNs when compared with the equivalent concentrations on the corresponding LLRNs. Accordingly, it could recently be demonstrated that pyrethroids like deltamethrin, cyfluthrin, permethrin and etofenprox impregnated onto LLINs do not prevent from landing, probing and biting activity of A. aegypti when using the arm-in-cage test (Faulde et al 2012). However, even low concentrations of DEET or IR3535 directly influence mosquito landing and probing frequency, hot-feet effect, excito-repellency and spatial repellency in LLIRNs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Quantification of permethrin, etofenprox, DEET and IR3535 Measurement of permethrin, etofenprox, DEET and IR3535 in unwashed fabrics was accomplished by using the validated method of the Central Institute of the German Armed Forces Medical Service Koblenz (Faulde et al , 2012. In order to receive a representative sample of the given material, at least five subsamples were removed from different locations (depending on the available amount of the material) and cut into pieces of approximately 0.5 square centimetres.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synergistic insecticidal and repellent effects of combined pyrethroid and repellent-impregnated bed nets using a novel long-lasting polymer-coating multi-layer technique

Faulde

Nehring²

2012

Parasitol Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New and improved strategies for malaria control and prevention are urgently needed. As a contribution to an optimized personal protection strategy, a novel long-lasting insecticide and repellent-treated net (LLIRN) has been designed by binding combinations of permethrin plus N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET), or insect repellent 3535 (IR3535), and etofenprox plus DEET, onto fibres of bed net fabric employing a new multi-layer polymer-coating technique. Protective repellent efficacy, toxicological effectiveness and residual activity of 12 LLIRN types have been evaluated by laboratory testing against adult Aedes aegypti. The novel multi-layer LLIRN design allowed simultaneous embedding at concentrations up to 5,930 mg/m(2) for DEET, 3,408 mg/m(2) for IR3535, 2,296 mg/m(2) for permethrin and 2,349 mg/m(2) for etofenprox, respectively. IR3535 layers prevented co-binding of additional pyrethroid-containing polymer layers, thus making pyrethroids plus DEET LLIRNs an ideal combination. All LLIRNs revealed synergistic insecticidal effects which, when measured against concentration controls of the isolated compounds, were significant in all LLIRN types designed. DEET in DEET plus permethrin LLIRNs significantly (p < 0.0001) reduced the concentration-dependent permethrin 100 % knockdown (KD) time from 55 to 75 %, the corresponding 100 % kill time (p < 0.0001) from 55 to 64 %. DEET in DEET plus etofenprox LLIRNs reduced the dose-specific 100 % knockdown (KD) time of etofenprox from 42 to 50 % (p = 0.004), the 100 % kill time from 25 to 38 % (p < 0.0001). Permethrin or etofenprox did not influence spatial repellency of DEET or IR3535 on LLIRNs. Vice versa, DEET and IR3535 increased spatial and excitatory repellency and reduced landing and probing frequency on LLIRNs resulting in strongly enhanced biting protection, even at low concentrations. One hundred percent biting and probing protection of stored LLIRNs was preserved for 83 weeks with the 5,930 mg/m(2) DEET and 2,139 mg/m(2) etofenprox LLIRN, for 72 weeks with the 5,002 mg/m(2) DEET and 2,349 mg/m(2) etofenprox LLIRN, for 63 weeks with the 3,590 mg/m(2) DEET and 1,208 mg/m(2) permethrin LLRN, and for 61 weeks with the 4,711 mg/m(2) DEET and 702 mg/m(2) etofenprox LLIRN. Because 100 % bite protection with up to 75 % quicker contact toxicity of pyrethroids were documented, synergistic toxicological and repellent effects of multi-layer polymer-coating LLIRNs may overcome LLIN-triggered selection pressure for development of new kdr- and metabolic pyrethroid resistances while simultaneously increasing protective efficacy also against kdr- and metabolic pyrethroid-resistant mosquitoes substantially due to the repellent-induced effects of LLIRNs thus indicating that this approach is a promising new candidate for future bed net, curtain, and window screen impregnation aiming at optimized prevention from mosquito-borne diseases.

show abstract

“…Lack of protection against landing and biting mosquitoes when LLIN contacts the skin is known; a complete lack of biting protection of deltamethrin and permethrin LLINs was reported by Faulde et al . [33] against Aedes aegypti . This inability of LLINs in contact with the body to prevent landing and biting mosquitoes suggests low levels of spatial repellence from permethrin.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory and experimental hut evaluation of a long-lasting insecticide treated blanket for protection against mosquitoes

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLong-lasting insecticide treated blankets (LLIBs) may provide additional protection against malaria where use of long lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) is low or impractical such as in disaster or emergency situations.MethodsInitial efficacy testing of a new candidate LLIB was carried out at LSHTM and KCMUCo, before and after washing, in cone and ball bioassays and arm-in-cage tests against pyrethroid susceptible Anopheles gambiae. A small scale field trial was conducted using veranda-trap experimental huts in northern Tanzania against wild An. arabiensis and Culex quinquefasciatus mosquitoes. Treatments included unwashed and 5 times washed permethrin treated LLIB and blankets hand-treated with permethrin (ITB), untreated blankets, and a holed unwashed Olyset net.ResultsCone test mortality was 75% for LLIB when unwashed, but decreased to 32% after 5 washes and <10% after 10 washes. In arm-in-cage tests protection against biting was 100% for LLIBs regardless of the number of washes while reduction in landings was 79% when unwashed, 75% after 5 washes, but declined to 41% after 10 and 33% after 20 washes. In ball bioassays using pyrethroid resistant An. arabiensis, mortality was low in all treatments (<35%) and there was no significant difference in mortality between Olyset net, LLIB or ITB (p > 0.05). Percentage mortality of An. arabiensis in huts with LLIB unwashed (26%) was not statistically different to Olyset net (31%, p = 0.5). The 5 times washed LLIB reduced blood-feeding by 49% which was equivalent to Olyset net (p > 0.086). There was no significant difference in percentage blood-feeding between LLIB and ITB unwashed or 5 times washed (p = 0.147 and p = 0.346 respectively). The 5 times washed LLIB reduced blood-feeding of Culex quinquefasciatus by 40%, although the Olyset provided the greatest protection with 85% inhibition. ELISA analysis of a sub-sample of blood fed mosquitoes showed that not all had fed on humans in the huts, therefore blood-feeding inhibition may have been underestimated.ConclusionsThis trial demonstrated the potential of LLIBs to provide substantial personal protection even against pyrethroid resistant mosquitoes. LLIBs may prove particularly useful where LLINs are unsuitable or net usage is low.

show abstract

Novel long-lasting impregnation technique transferred from clothing to bednets: extended efficacy and residual activity of different pyrethroids against Aedes aegypti as shown by EN ISO 6330-standardized machine laundering

Cited by 19 publications

References 23 publications

Comparison of the Laboratory Standard Washing Using CIPAC Washing Agent and the Domestic Washing on Three Recommended Types of Long-Lasting Insecticidal Mosquito Nets

Comparison of the Laboratory Standard Washing Using CIPAC Washing Agent and the Domestic Washing on Three Recommended Types of Long-Lasting Insecticidal Mosquito Nets

Synergistic insecticidal and repellent effects of combined pyrethroid and repellent-impregnated bed nets using a novel long-lasting polymer-coating multi-layer technique

Laboratory and experimental hut evaluation of a long-lasting insecticide treated blanket for protection against mosquitoes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About