The use of germicidal ultraviolet light, vaporised hydrogen peroxide and dry heat to decontaminate face masks and filtering respirators contaminated with an infectious norovirus

Wielick, Constance; Ludwig‐Begall, Louisa F.; Dams, Lorène; Razafimahefa, Ravo M.; Demeuldre, Pierre-Francois; Napp, Aurore; Laperre, Jan; Jolois, Olivier; Farnir, Frédéric; Haubruge, Éric; Thiry, Étienne

doi:10.1101/2020.09.04.20188250

Cited by 6 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Per time point (0 hour, 1 day, 2 days, 3 days, 4 days, 5 days, 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days) and per virus (PRCV or MuNoV), one SM or FFR was inoculated. The workflow followed previously described protocols for SM and FFR inoculation and virus elution [ 31 , 33 ]. Briefly, per SM or FFR, 100 μl of undiluted viral suspension were injected under the first outer layer at the centre of each of three square coupons (34 mm x 34 mm) previously outlined in graphite pencil on the intact SMs or FFRs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We previously demonstrated efficient single-cycle VHP, UVGI, and DH decontamination of SMs and FFRs inoculated with two in vitro cultivable BSL2 pathogens. Inactivation of the infectious SARS-CoV-2 surrogate porcine respiratory coronavirus (PRCV) [26][27][28][29][30] demonstrated virucidal activity of all three methods against enveloped coronaviruses [31]; decontamination of hardier non-enveloped human respiratory or oral pathogens, which can equally contaminate SMs or FFRs [9,32], was investigated using the notoriously tenacious murine norovirus model (MuNoV) [33][34][35][36].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“Don, doff, discard” to “don, doff, decontaminate”—FFR and mask integrity and inactivation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate and a norovirus following multiple vaporised hydrogen peroxide-, ultraviolet germicidal irradiation-, and dry heat decontaminations

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background As the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic accelerates, the supply of personal protective equipment remains under strain. To combat shortages, re-use of surgical masks and filtering facepiece respirators has been recommended. Prior decontamination is paramount to the re-use of these typically single-use only items and, without compromising their integrity, must guarantee inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 and other contaminating pathogens. Aim We provide information on the effect of time-dependent passive decontamination (infectivity loss over time during room temperature storage in a breathable bag) and evaluate inactivation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate and a non-enveloped model virus as well as mask and respirator integrity following active multiple-cycle vaporised hydrogen peroxide (VHP), ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI), and dry heat (DH) decontamination. Methods Masks and respirators, inoculated with infectious porcine respiratory coronavirus or murine norovirus, were submitted to passive decontamination or single or multiple active decontamination cycles; viruses were recovered from sample materials and viral titres were measured via TCID50 assay. In parallel, filtration efficiency tests and breathability tests were performed according to EN standard 14683 and NIOSH regulations. Results and discussion Infectious porcine respiratory coronavirus and murine norovirus remained detectable on masks and respirators up to five and seven days of passive decontamination. Single and multiple cycles of VHP-, UVGI-, and DH were shown to not adversely affect bacterial filtration efficiency of masks. Single- and multiple UVGI did not adversely affect respirator filtration efficiency, while VHP and DH induced a decrease in filtration efficiency after one or three decontamination cycles. Multiple cycles of VHP-, UVGI-, and DH slightly decreased airflow resistance of masks but did not adversely affect respirator breathability. VHP and UVGI efficiently inactivated both viruses after five, DH after three, decontamination cycles, permitting demonstration of a loss of infectivity by more than three orders of magnitude. This multi-disciplinal approach provides important information on how often a given PPE item may be safely reused.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Don, doff, discard” to “don, doff, decontaminate”—FFR and mask integrity and inactivation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate and a norovirus following multiple vaporised hydrogen peroxide-, ultraviolet germicidal irradiation-, and dry heat decontaminations

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Per time point (0 hour, 1 day, 2 days, 3 days, 4 days, 5 days, 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days) and per virus (PRCV or MuNoV), one SM or FFR was inoculated. The workflow followed previously described protocols for SM and FFR inoculation and virus elution (31,33). Briefly, per SM or FFR, 100 µl of undiluted viral suspension were injected under the first outer layer at the centre of each of three square coupons (34 mm × 34 mm) previously outlined in graphite pencil on the intact SMs or FFRs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We previously demonstrated efficient single-cycle VHP, UVGI, and DH decontamination of SMs and FFRs inoculated with two in vitro cultivable BSL2 pathogens. Inactivation of the infectious SARS-CoV-2 surrogate porcine respiratory coronavirus (PRCV) (26–30) demonstrated virucidal activity of all three methods against enveloped coronaviruses (31); decontamination of hardier non-enveloped human respiratory or oral pathogens, which can equally contaminate SMs or FFRs (9,32), was investigated using the notoriously tenacious murine norovirus model (MuNoV) (33–36).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From “don, doff, and discard” to “don, doff, and decontaminate” – determination of filtering facepiece respirator and surgical mask integrity and inactivation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate and a small non-enveloped virus following multiple-cycles of vaporised hydrogen peroxide, ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, and dry heat decontamination

Ludwig‐Begall¹,

Wielick²,

Jolois

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAs the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic accelerates, the supply of personal protective equipment remains under strain. To combat shortages, re-use of surgical masks and filtering facepiece respirators has been recommended. Prior decontamination is paramount to the re-use of these typically single-use only items and, without compromising their integrity, must guarantee inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 and other contaminating pathogens.AimWe provide information on the effect of time-dependent passive decontamination at room temperature and evaluate inactivation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate and a non-enveloped model virus as well as mask and respirator integrity following active multiple-cycle vaporised hydrogen peroxide (VHP), ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI), and dry heat (DH) decontamination.MethodsMasks and respirators, inoculated with infectious porcine respiratory coronavirus or murine norovirus, were submitted to passive decontamination or single or multiple active decontamination cycles; viruses were recovered from sample materials and viral titres were measured via TCID50 assay. In parallel, filtration efficiency tests and breathability tests were performed according to EN standard 14683 and NIOSH regulations.Results and DiscussionInfectious porcine respiratory coronavirus and murine norovirus remained detectable on masks and respirators up to five and seven days of passive decontamination. Single and multiple cycles of VHP-, UVGI-, and DH were shown to not adversely affect bacterial filtration efficiency of masks. Single- and multiple UVGI did not adversely affect respirator filtration efficiency, while VHP and DH induced a decrease in filtration efficiency after one or three decontamination cycles. Multiple cycles of VHP-, UVGI-, and DH slightly decreased airflow resistance of masks but did not adversely affect respirator breathability. VHP and UVGI efficiently inactivated both viruses after five, DH after three, decontamination cycles, permitting demonstration of a loss of infectivity by more than three orders of magnitude. This multi-disciplinal approach provides important information on how often a given PPE item may be safely reused.

show abstract

“… Widely used in hospitals for disinfecting surfaces. Directly damages DNA of pathogens, releases ozone gas, require pre-filters ( Chang et al, 1985 ; Kierat et al, 2020 ; Nakpan et al, 2019 ; Wielick et al, 2021 ) Ionization filter Use high dc voltage through corona discharge In industries and as portable purifiers in residential buildings Low energy costs, reduced formation of harmful emissions, potential health benefits, excessive electrostatic discharge charges objects, O 3 emissions ( Dong et al, 2019 ; Grabarczyk, 2001 ; Shiue et al, 2011 ) …”

Section: Indoor Air Quality Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indoor air quality improvement in COVID-19 pandemic: Review

Agarwal

Meena

Raj

et al. 2021

Sustainable Cities and Society

195

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The advent of COVID-19 has impinged millions of people. The increased concern of the virus spread in confined spaces due to meteorological factors has sequentially fostered the need to improve indoor air quality. Objective This paper aims to review control measures and preventive sustainable solutions for the future that can deliberately help in bringing down the impact of declined air quality and prevent future biological attacks from affecting the occupant’s health. Methodology Anontology chart is constructed based on the set objectives and review of all the possible measures to improve the indoor air quality taking into account the affecting parameters has been done. Observations An integrated approach considering non-pharmaceutical and engineering control measures together for a healthy indoor environment should be contemplated rather than discretizing the available solutions. Maintaining social distance by reducing occupant density and implementing a modified ventilation system with advance filters for decontamination of viral load can help in sustaining healthy indoor air quality. Conclusion The review paper in the main, provides a brief overview of all the improvement techniques bearing in mind thermal comfort and safety of occupants and looks for a common ground for all the technologies based on literature survey and offers recommendation for a sustainable future.

show abstract

The use of germicidal ultraviolet light, vaporised hydrogen peroxide and dry heat to decontaminate face masks and filtering respirators contaminated with an infectious norovirus

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

“Don, doff, discard” to “don, doff, decontaminate”—FFR and mask integrity and inactivation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate and a norovirus following multiple vaporised hydrogen peroxide-, ultraviolet germicidal irradiation-, and dry heat decontaminations

“Don, doff, discard” to “don, doff, decontaminate”—FFR and mask integrity and inactivation of a SARS-CoV-2 surrogate and a norovirus following multiple vaporised hydrogen peroxide-, ultraviolet germicidal irradiation-, and dry heat decontaminations

Indoor air quality improvement in COVID-19 pandemic: Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About