Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 7, 2025

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Organic Peroxyacids for Eradicating Dairy Biofilms Using an Approach Combining Static and Dynamic Methods
Published on: December 9, 2022
Determining the Efficacy of Chemicals for the Inactivation of Liquid Waste Containing Gram-Positive Bacteria of Risk
Jérémy Rotzetter1, Ngoc Dung Le2, Flurina L Leib2
1Applied Biosafety, Institute for Infectious Diseases, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Background:
Inactivation of infectious liquid waste can be performed by different means, including autoclaving or chemical inactivation. Autoclaving is most widely used, but cannot always be implemented, so that chemical inactivation is a possible alternative. However, its efficacy has to be proven by in-house validation. Here, we provide an easy-to-implement validation process adapted from existing standards.
Methods:
The bactericidal activity of two commercially available disinfectants, containing glucoprotamine or peracetic acid, was tested on two gram-positive bacteria, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (SP). Quantitative suspension tests were adapted from the European standard EN 13727. Membrane filtration was used to remove any trace of the active antiseptic. The stability of working solutions and the effect of different organic loads were also assessed. Further, the aquatic toxicity of glucoprotamine was tested on the viability and behavior of zebrafish larvae.
Results:
Peracetic acid was highly efficient against both strains, even at a working concentration of 0.25% for 1 minute S. pneumoniae was also highly sensitive to glucoprotamine, whereas MRSA required either higher concentrations (1%) or longer exposure times (30 min) at lower concentrations. Further, the lethal dosis that kills 50% of the embryos (LD50) for glucoprotamine was 3-3.5 mg/L using the zebrafish Embryo Acute Toxicity Test.
Conclusion:
We could confirm the very high efficacy of glucoprotamine- and peracetic-based disinfectants to inactivate liquid waste containing gram-positive bacteria. Also considering aquatic toxicity, this methodology could help laboratories to establish validated procedures for chemical inactivation of infectious liquid wastes relevant to their institution, balancing efficacy, and environmental issues.
More Related Videos
14:17The Portable Chemical Sterilizer PCS, D-FENS, and D-FEND ALL: Novel Chlorine Dioxide Decontamination Technologies for the Military
Published on: June 29, 2014
06:58Author Spotlight: Advancing Caenorhabditis elegans Research Using Paraformaldehyde-Treated Bacteria
Published on: July 28, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Sterilization II: Chemical Methods
Using chemical sterilization rather than heat to clean out equipment is recommended. It eradicates and removes all bacteria,...
Methods of Sterilization I: Physical Methods
Steam sterilization uses non-toxic, low-cost moist heat in the form of saturated steam under pressure, which is fast, microbicidal, and sporicidal, and quickly warms and penetrates fabrics. Autoclaves, or steam sterilizers, expose each item to direct steam contact for a predetermined time at the necessary...
Cleaning, Sterilization, and Disinfection
Cleaning
The cleaning process usually involves using water with detergents or enzymatic cleaner and removing foreign material from objects and surfaces, including organic material such as body fluids or inorganic material like soil. Cleaning is performed before high-level disinfection and sterilization because foreign materials on the cover of the devices interfere with process...
Hand hygiene
Hand washing...
Prevention of Further Absorption of Poison