Assessment of environmental viral contamination of liquids prepared in a closed system drug transfer device

Main Article Content

Dr. Maya Amichay https://orcid.org/0009-0003-0164-0771
Dr. Elana A. Slutsky Smith https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9277-1395
Dr. Shiri Salomon https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8194-426X

Keywords

Closed Systems, Coronaviridae, Antineoplastic Agents Handling, Environmental Pollution

Abstract

Background: Closed system transfer devices (CSTDs) enable preparation and transfer of drugs into syringes and infusion bags, while protecting healthcare professionals from exposure to hazardous drugs. Drug products contaminated by bacteria or viruses harbor a clinical risk to patients. Therefore, CSTDs must also prevent environmental contamination of the compounded liquid. Some CSTDs require priming of syringes with environmental air and introduction of this air into the drug vial for pressure equalization during liquid withdrawal. We examined whether this methodology puts the vial contents at risk for contamination by the human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43). Methods: A CSTD requiring syringe priming was used to transfer liquids between a sterile vial containing saline, a sterile syringe, and, in some cases, an intravenous (IV) bag inside a  sealed glove box contaminated by HCoV-OC43 aerosols. Viral contamination of the transferred liquids after a single transfer into a syringe, or after 3 transfers (from the vial into the syringe then from the syringe into the IV bag, and from the IV bag back into the syringe), was assessed by detecting the presence of HCoV-OC43 RNA using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Results: Liquid transferred in a sterile environment using the CSTD was not contaminated but liquid transferred once from the vial into a syringe in a coronavirus-contaminated environment showed cycle threshold (Ct) values corresponding to 3.8-9.4 plaque forming units (PFU)/ml in all 9 replicates tested. Liquid transferred three times in a coronavirus-contaminated environment showed Ct values corresponding to 2.5-4 PFU/ml, but in 3 of the 9 replicates tested Ct values were not detected. Conclusions: Liquids contained by CSTDs are susceptible to HCoV-OC43 contamination when the CSTD used requires aspiration of environmental air into a syringe.

Abstract 228 | PDF Downloads 260

References

1. NIOSH. Preventing occupational exposures to antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs in health care settings. Cincinnati: US: Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health;2004.
2. Besheer A, Burton L, Galas RJ, Jr Gokhale K, Goldbach P, Hu Q, et al. An Industry Perspective on Compatibility Assessment of Closed System Drug-Transfer Devices for Biologics. J Pharm Sci. 2021;110(2): 610-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2020.10.047
3. USP. Chapter <800>: Hazardous drugs—handling in healthcare settings. . In: The United States Pharmacopeia, 39th rev., and The National Formulary, 34th ed. First supplement Rockville, MD: US Pharmacopeial Convention; 2016.
4. Sessink PJ, Connor TH, Jorgenson JA, Tyler TG. Reduction in surface contamination with antineoplastic drugs in 22 hospital pharmacies in the US following implementation of a closed-system drug transfer device. Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice. 2011;17(1):39-48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155210361431
5. Wick C, Slawson MH, Jorgenson JA, Tyler LS. Using a closed-system protective device to reduce personnel exposure to antineoplastic agents. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2003;60(22):2314-20. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/60.22.2314
6. Clark BA, Sessink PJ. Use of a closed system drug-transfer device eliminates surface contamination with antineoplastic agents. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2013;19(2):99-104. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155212468367
7. Sessink PJM, Nyulasi T, Haraldsson ELM, Rebic B. Reduction of Contamination with Antibiotics on Surfaces and in Environmental Air in Three European Hospitals Following Implementation of a Closed-System Drug Transfer Device. Ann Work Expo Health.
2019;63(4):459-67. https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxz010
8. Sessink PJ, Trahan J, Coyne JW. Reduction in Surface Contamination With Cyclophosphamide in 30 US Hospital Pharmacies Following Implementation of a Closed-System Drug Transfer Device. Hosp Pharm. 2013;48(3):204-12. https://doi.org/10.1310/
hpj4803-204
9. Harrison BR, Peters BG, Bing MR. Comparison of surface contamination with cyclophosphamide and fluorouracil using a closed-system drug transfer device versus standard preparation techniques. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2006;63(18):1736-44.
https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp050258
10. Bartel SB, Tyler TG, Power LA. Multicenter evaluation of a new closed system drug-transfer device in reducing surface contamination by antineoplastic hazardous drugs. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2018;75(4):199-211. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp160948
11. Valero S, Lopez-Briz E, Vila N, Solana A, Melero M, Poveda JL. Pre and post intervention study of antiblastic drugs contamination surface levels at a Pharmacy Department Compounding Area using a closed system drug transfer device and a decontamination
process. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2018;95:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2018.03.001
12. Macias AE, Huertas M, de Leon SP, Munoz JM, Chavez AR, Sifuentes-Osornio J, et al. Contamination of intravenous fluids: a continuing cause of hospital bacteremia. Am J Infect Control. 2010;38(3):217-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2009.08.015
13. Macias AE, de Leon SP, Huertas M, Maravilla E, Romero C,Montoya TG, et al. Endemic infusate contamination and related bacteremia. Am J Infect Control. 2008;36(1):48-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2007.02.003
14. Hernandez-Ramos I, Gaitan-Meza J, Garcia-Gaitan E, Leon-Ramirez AR, Justiniani-Cedeno N, Avila-Figueroa C. Extrinsic contamination of intravenous infusates administered to hospitalized children in Mexico. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2000;19(9):888-
90. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006454-200009000-00017
15. Muller AE, Huisman I, Roos PJ, Rietveld AP, Klein J, Harbers JB, et al. Outbreak of severe sepsis due to contaminated propofol: lessons to learn. J Hosp Infect. 2010;76(3):225-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2010.06.003
16. Vonberg RP, Gastmeier P. Hospital-acquired infections related to contaminated substances. J Hosp Infect. 2007;65(1):15-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2006.09.018
17. Mills A, Yousef M. Sterility testing using a closed system transfer device in oncology medication compounding: a novel method for testing partially used vials. Drugs & Therapy Perspectives. 2021;37:206-211
18. De Prijck K, D’Haese E, Vandenbroucke J, Coucke W, Robays H, Nelis HJ. Microbiological challenge of four protective devices for the reconstitution of cytotoxic agents. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2008;47(6):543-548.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-
765x.2008.02463.x
19. Soubieux A, Tanguay C, Bussieres JF. Review of studies examining microbial contamination of vials used for preparations done with closed-system drug transfer devices. Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2021;28(2):65-70. https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2019-001913
20. Merten OW. Virus contaminations of cell cultures - A biotechnological view. Cytotechnology. 2002;39(2):91-116. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022969101804
21. Amichay M, Shimon O, Raveh E. Prevention of coronavirus contamination from the environment using an air-cleaning closed system drug-transfer device. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2021;19(4):2576. https://doi.org/10.18549/pharmpract.2021.4.2576
22. Szkiladz A, Hegner S. Evaluation of three barrier-type closed system transfer devices using the 2015 NIOSH vapor containment performance draft protocol. Drugs Ther Perspect. 2022;38(4):177-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40267-022-00905-x
23. BD PhaSeal™ Optima System clinical procedures manual. Franklin Lakes, NJ: BD;2022.
24. Barker J, Stevens D, Bloomfield SF. Spread and prevention of some common viral infections in community facilities and domestic homes. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2001;91(1):7-21. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2001.01364.x
25. Liu DX, Liang JQ, Fung TS. Human Coronavirus-229E, -OC43, -NL63, and -HKU1 (Coronaviridae). Encyclopedia of Virology. 2021;428-40.
26. Vijgen L, Keyaerts E, Moes E, Thoelen I, Wollants E, Lemey P, et al. Complete genomic sequence of human coronavirus OC43: molecular clock analysis suggests a relatively recent zoonotic coronavirus transmission event. J Virol. 2005;79(3):1595-1604.
https://doi.org/10.1128/jvi.79.3.1595-1604.2005
27. Fennelly KP. Particle sizes of infectious aerosols: implications for infection control. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8(9):914-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-2600(20)30323-4
28. Santillo M, Field A, Henderson J, Hogan A, Thoms E, Manomano N, et al. Guidance on Handling of Injectable Cytotoxic Drugs in Clinical Areas in NHS Hospitals in the UK. Edition 1. NHS Pharmaceutical Quality Assurance Committee;2018.