|Year : 2021 | Volume
| Issue : 3 | Page : 510-516
Chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic practice
Shefali R Parikh, Rajul S Parikh
Consultant, Shreeji Eye Clinic and Palak's Glaucoma Care Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
|Date of Submission||19-May-2020|
|Date of Acceptance||29-Jul-2020|
|Date of Web Publication||17-Feb-2021|
Dr. Rajul S Parikh
Shreeji Eye Clinic and Palak's Glacuoma Care Centre, Samrat Bldg, Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400 069, Maharashtra
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
The instrumentation used in ophthalmic clinics can be a source of epidemics in health care set up. Contact tonometry with Schiotz or Applanation tonometer is associated with nosocomial epidemic keratoconjunctivitis outbreaks. Recently identified SARS-CoV-2 (COVID -19) spreads mainly via the respiratory route and fomites and can transmit through other body fluids, including tear film. Various ophthalmic instruments can become a common source of spreading cross infections. Chemical disinfection is one of the most common methods employed to decontaminate instruments and environmental surfaces and prevent transmission of infectious pathogens to patients through medical and surgical instruments. Various chemical disinfectants are available with a varied spectrum to work on a different group of organisms. In this article, we briefly cover commonly used chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic practice like Alcohol (Ethyl Alcohol, Isopropyl Alcohol), Chlorine-based solution (mainly Sodium Hypochlorite), Glutaraldehyde, Hydrogen Peroxide, Formaldehyde, Iodophors, and Quaternary Ammonium Compounds
Keywords: Chemical disinfectants, glutaraldehyde, isopropyl alcohol, ophthalmic practice, sodium hypochlorite
|How to cite this article:|
Parikh SR, Parikh RS. Chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic practice. Indian J Ophthalmol 2021;69:510-6
The instrumentation used + in ophthalmic clinics can be a source of epidemics in health care set up. Contact tonometry with Schiotz or applanation tonometer is associated with Nosocomial Epidemic Keratoconjunctivitis outbreaks. Recently identified SARS-CoV-2 (COVID -19) spreads mainly via the respiratory route and fomites and can transmit through other body fluids, including tear film. Various ophthalmic instruments can become a common source of spreading cross infections. Chemical disinfection is one of the most common methods used to decontaminate instruments and environmental surfaces and prevent transmission of infectious pathogens to patients through medical and surgical instruments. Various chemical disinfectants are available with a varied spectrum to work on a different group of organisms. In this article, we briefly cover commonly used chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic practice like Alcohol (Ethyl Alcohol, Isopropyl Alcohol), Chlorine-based solutions (mainly Sodium Hypochlorite), Glutaraldehyde, Hydrogen Peroxide, Formaldehyde, Iodophors, and Quaternary Ammonium Compounds.
The instrumentation used in the outpatient department (OPD) and operation theatres can be a source of an epidemic in health care set up. Contact tonometry with Schiotz or applanation tonometer is a known risk factor for epidemic keratoconjunctivitis (EKC) and also linked to nosocomial EKC outbreaks., other specialties have also documented similar incidences of nosocomial infection via instruments., Failure to properly disinfect or sterilize equipment carries the risk for person-to-person transmission (e.g., hepatitis B virus) and transmission of environmental pathogens (e.g., Pseudomonas aeruginosa).
We must understand the difference between sterilant and disinfectant, the terminologies used routinely and flexibly in practice. 'Sterilization' refers to a physical or chemical process that destroys or removes all microbial life, including spores. Unlike sterilization, disinfection is not sporicidal. A few disinfectants can kill spores with prolonged exposure times (3–12 h); these are called 'chemical sterilants.' At similar concentrations but with shorter exposure periods (e.g., 20 min for 2% glutaraldehyde), these same disinfectants can kill all microorganisms except large numbers of bacterial spores; they are called high-level disinfectants. Low-level disinfectants can kill most vegetative bacteria, fungi, and some viruses in a reasonable time (=10 min). Prior cleaning of the object; the presence of organic and inorganic load; type and level of microbial contamination; concentration of and exposure time to the disinfectant; physical nature of the object (e.g., crevices, hinges, and lumens); temperature and pH of the disinfection process affects the efficacy of both disinfection and sterilization.
SARS-CoV-2, the virus linked to the current pandemic, is an enveloped virus with an extraordinarily large single-stranded RNA genome ranging from 26 to 32 kilobases in length. It has a fragile outer lipid envelope that makes it more susceptible to disinfectants and heat than non-enveloped viruses such as Rotavirus, Norovirus, and Poliovirus. It has already affected nearly 200 countries and territories. This virus spreads mainly via respiratory route and fomites; reports also suggest conjunctivitis as one spectrum of its presentation and a high probability of virus being present in the body fluids including tear film.,
Recently, AIOS-IJO Consensus statement and AIOS guidelines suggested incongruent concentrations of sodium hypochlorite (1% & 0.5% respectively) for sterilization of various ophthalmic instruments in OPD., Variability in guidelines may create ambiguity and apprehension among ophthalmologists. In the unacquainted pandemic, it is a physician's onus to prevent the spread of this virus through instruments from patient to patient. This article attempts to re-visit commonly used disinfectants in ophthalmic practice, which may formulate an evidence-based approach towards the use of chemical disinfectants. [Table 1] lists frequently used chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic practice.
|Table 1: Summarizes commonly used Chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic practice with their known mechanism of action, microbicidal activity, common side effects, and special instructions|
Click here to view
| Alcohol|| |
Ethyl Alcohol and Isopropyl Alcohol are commonly used solutions in the healthcare industry. Their cidal activity declines sharply below the dilution of 50% concentration, and the optimum bactericidal concentration is 60%–90% solutions in water (volume/volume). Its antimicrobial action is due to the denaturation of proteins. Its bacteriostatic effect is due to the inhibition of the production of metabolites essential for rapid cell division. 60%–80% concentration of Ethyl alcohol is a potent virucidal agent that can inactivate all of the lipophilic viruses (e.g., Corona viridae, Herpes, Vaccinia, and Influenza) and many hydrophilic viruses (Adenovirus, Rotavirus). Isopropyl alcohol is not active against the non-lipid enteroviruses like Adenovirus but is active against the lipid viruses (e.g., Coronavirus group).,, Alcohols based disinfectants can be used effectively for sterilization of various health care instrumentation.,, Isopropyl Alcohol Swabs are used to disinfect Goldmann Applanation tips/Goniolenses/other non-contact lenses. However, the alcohol-based solution can damage the shellac mountings of lensed instruments, tend to swell and harden rubber and certain plastic tubing after prolonged and repeated use, bleach rubber and plastic tiles, and damage tonometer tips (by the deterioration of the glue) after the equivalent of 1 working year of routine use. Tonometer biprisms soaked in alcohol for four days developed rough front surfaces that potentially could cause corneal damage. Corneal opacification is reported if IOP is measured immediately after cleaning tonometer tips with alcohol. Alcohols are flammable and consequently must be stored in a cool, well-ventilated area. Food and Drug Administration of the United States of America (USFDA) does not approve Alcohol-based solutions as a chemical sterilant or high-level disinfectant.
Commonly used commercially available Alcohol products containing Ethyl Alcohol are Sterlium and Hexiprep-T, and those containing Isopropyl alcohol are BD Swab and Sterlomax.
| Chlorine and Chlorine Compounds|| |
Hypochlorites, the most widely used of the chlorine disinfectants, are available as liquid (e.g., sodium hypochlorite) or solid (e.g., calcium hypochlorite). The most prevalent chlorine products are aqueous solutions of 5.25%–6.15% sodium hypochlorite, usually called household bleach. They have a broad spectrum of antimicrobial activity, do not leave toxic residues, are unaffected by water hardness, are inexpensive, and fast-acting, Sodium hypochlorite at the concentration used in household bleach (5.25%–6.15%) can produce ocular irritation or oropharyngeal, esophageal, and gastric burns and chemical corneal injury.,,,, It is corrosive to metals in high concentrations. The microbicidal activity of chlorine is attributed mostly to undissociated hypochlorous acid (HOCl). Hypochlorite solutions in tap water at a pH > 8 stored at room temperature (23°C) in closed, opaque plastic containers can lose up to 40%–50% of their free available chlorine level over one month.
The microbicidal mechanism of chlorine involves a combination of factors like ring chlorination of amino acids, loss of intracellular contents, decreased uptake of nutrients, inhibition of protein synthesis, decreased oxygen uptake, breaks in DNA, and depressed DNA synthesis leading to protein inhibition., Sodium Hypochlorite is bactericidal at 25 ppm (0.025%), fungicidal at 0.02% (200 ppm), sporicidal and mycobactericidal at 1000 ppm (0.1%), virucidal at 200 to 500 ppm (0.02%-0.05%).,,, It is effective against both lipophilic (including HIV) and hydrophilic groups of viruses. Sterilization of applanation tip and spot-disinfection of countertops and floors can be done by 0.1% to 0.5% freshly prepared solution of Sodium Hypochlorite.,,, However, one must remember that 0.5% solution of Sodium Hypochlorite is corrosive and reduces the prism life to maximum 100 cycles of 1 h each. 0.5% solution of Sodium Hypochlorite is recommended only for high contamination or large spills of blood and body fluids (>10 mL).
Alternative compounds that release chlorine and used in the healthcare setting include:
- Demand-release chlorine dioxide
- Sodium dichloroisocyanurate
- Superoxidized water.
The advantage of these compounds over the hypochlorites is that they retain chlorine longer and hence exert a bactericidal effect, and USFDA has approved them as a high-level disinfectant. However, we require specialized equipment to produce the super-oxidized water with perfect parameters such as pH, current, and redox potential. Super-oxidized water should have a pH of 5.5–7.0 and an oxidation-reduction potential (redox) of >900 mV.” We need to prepare it fresh as its effectivity reduces with time.,,
Commonly used commercially available products in India are Dakin's Solution (Sodium Hypochlorite 0.25% & 0.5%) and Hypocin Eyelid Cleaner (Super-oxidized solution).
| Glutaraldehyde|| |
Glutaraldehyde is a saturated dialdehyde. The antimicrobial activity of the solution depends on the duration of dilution, its concentration, and organic stress. Its alkaline solution is sporicidal. The biocidal activity of glutaraldehyde results from alkylation of sulfhydryl, hydroxyl, carboxyl, and amino groups of microorganisms, which alters RNA, DNA, and protein synthesis., ≥2% aqueous solutions of Glutaraldehyde, buffered to pH 7.5–8.5 with sodium bicarbonate is bactericidal in less than 2 min; mycobactericidal, fungicidal, virucidal in <10 min; and sporicidal in 3 h.,,,,, It is effective against both lipophilic and hydrophilic groups of viruses. A solution of 2.4% and 3.4% glutaraldehyde and combined solution of 1.12% glutaraldehyde with a 1.93% phenol/phenate is approved as a high-level disinfectant. Glutaraldehyde is non-corrosive and commonly used as a high-level disinfectant for medical equipment such as endoscopes, anesthesia equipment, and various medical instruments.,,,,, Bacillocid Special Solution, which contains Glutaraldehyde, can be used to clean Goldmann Applanation tips and Goniolenses. Once diluted, this solution has a shelf-life of minimally 14 days. As it is toxic and expensive, it should be avoided for cleaning of non-critical surfaces. If equipment's processing is done in poorly ventilated rooms, healthcare personnel can be exposed to high levels of glutaraldehyde vapor. Acute or chronic exposure can result in skin irritation or dermatitis, mucous membrane irritation (eye, nose, mouth), epistaxis, allergic contact dermatitis, asthma, and rhinitis.,,,
Commonly used commercially available products are Bacillocid Extra and Glutaraldehyde solution 2.45% by Glutradex.
| Formaldehyde|| |
Formaldehyde is used principally as a water-based solution called formalin, which is 37% formaldehyde by weight. The aqueous solution is bactericidal, mycobactericidal, fungicidal, virucidal, and sporicidal.,,, It is a potential carcinogen, and standard should be set, limiting employee's exposure time to formaldehyde as per standard guidelines. It inactivates microorganisms by alkylating the amino and sulfydryl groups of proteins and ring nitrogen atoms of purine bases. It destroys a wide range of microorganisms at varying concentrations. It is virucidal at 2% except poliovirus requires 8% concentration, mycobactericidal at 4%, and bactericidal at 2.5%. The sporicidal action of formaldehyde is slow and takes at least 2 h compared to only 15 min with Glutaraldehyde. Although formaldehyde-alcohol is a high-level disinfectant, its healthcare uses are limited by irritating fumes and pungent odor even at very low levels (<1 ppm). It mainly used as Fumigator in Operation Theater.
Commonly used commercially available products in India are Microtroniks Formaldehyde Solution (37-41% Formalin Solutions) and Daffodil's Formalin Solution (37%–41% W/V).
| Hydrogen Peroxide|| |
Stabilized Hydrogen Peroxide is extensively used in health care set up and has got approval as a high-level disinfectant. Concentrations of hydrogen peroxide from 6% to 25% show promise as chemical sterilants. It works by producing destructive hydroxyl free radicals that can attack membrane lipids, DNA, and other essential cell components. Organisms that possess cytochrome systems can protect cells by degrading hydrogen peroxide to water and oxygen., It has bactericidal, virucidal, sporicidal, and fungicidal properties., However, it has limited action against hydrophilic viruses (e.g., Adenovirus). Concentrations ranging from 3% to 6% are used to disinfect soft contact lenses (e.g., 3% for 2–3 hrs),, tonometer biprisms, and endoscopes.,,, Improperly rinsed applanation tip prism can cause corneal damage. As with other chemical sterilants, dilution of the hydrogen peroxide must be monitored by regularly testing the minimum effective concentration (i.e., 7.5%–6.0%). Hydrogen peroxide is exceptionally stable when stored in dark containers.
Commonly used commercially available products in India are Clorox Healthcare Hydrogen Peroxide and Hydrogen Peroxide 3% by National Peroxide Ltd.
| Iodophors|| |
An iodophor is a combination of iodine and a solubilizing agent or carrier; the resulting complex provides a sustained-release reservoir of iodine and releases small amounts of free iodine in aqueous solution. The best-known and most widely used iodophor is povidone-iodine, a compound of polyvinylpyrrolidone with iodine. Iodine can quickly penetrate the cell wall of microorganisms and disrupt the synthesis of protein and nucleic acid. Iodophors are bactericidal, mycobactericidal, and virucidal but require prolonged contact times to kill certain fungi and bacterial spores.,, Most commercially available iodophors are not sporicidal at their recommended use-dilution. Its use in Ophthalmology is limited to pre-operative cleaning of the surgical site and disinfecting medical instruments and endoscopes. They are not suitable for disinfecting hard surfaces. USFDA has not cleared any liquid chemical sterilant or high-level disinfectants with iodophors as the main active ingredient.
Commonly used commercially available products in India are BETADINE* 5% Sterile Ophthalmic Prep Solution and Wokadine 5% Solution.
| Quaternary Ammonium Compounds|| |
The quaternary ammonium compounds are commonly used disinfectants. Their activity reduces in hard water; however, the newer quaternary ammonium compounds referred to dialkyl quaternary (e.g., didecyl dimethyl ammonium bromide) remain active in hard water. It causes inactivation of energy-producing enzymes, denaturation of essential cell proteins, and disruption of the cell membrane. It is fungicidal, bactericidal, and virucidal against lipophilic (enveloped) viruses but ineffective against hydrophilic (nonenveloped) viruses. This compound is less corrosive compared to sodium hypochlorite. Its use is common in environmental sanitation of non-critical surfaces, such as floors, furniture, and walls. It can also be used for disinfecting medical equipment that contacts intact skin (e.g., trial frame).
Commonly used commercially available products in India are D-125 (3rd generation twin chain quaternary ammonium compound), D-256 (5th generation twin chain quaternary ammonium compound) from Microgen.
[Table 1] summarizes commonly used Chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic practice with their known mechanism of action, microbicidal activity, common side effects, and special instructions. [Table 2] summarizes the suggested uses of the chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic OPD with the most commonly available commercial products.
|Table 2: Summarizes the suggested uses of the chemical disinfectants in ophthalmic OPD|
Click here to view
| Conclusion|| |
To conclude, we need to address the issues of cross-infection and the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. As physicians, we have the onus to prevent or minimize the risk of spreading infection from patient to patient. As everyone is naïve to this pandemic, it becomes difficult to decide the type of disinfectant to choose from the current armamentarium of disinfectants. Proper knowledge of all available chemical disinfectants may help us in our decision making, and by making minor changes in our current protocols of disinfection, we shall be able to keep patients and ourselves on a safer side.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Warren D, Nelson KE, Farrar JA. A large outbreak of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis: Problems in controlling nosocomial spread. J Infect Dis 1989;160:938-43.
Weber DJ, Rutala WA. Nosocomial ocular infections. In: Mayhall CG, ed. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1999. p. 287-99.
Cheng VC, Wong SC, Sridhar S, Cheng VC, Wong SC, Sridhar S, et al
. Management of an incident of failed sterilization of surgical instruments in a dental clinic in Hong Kong. J Formos Med Assoc 2013;112:666-75.
Dancer SJ, Stewart M, Coulombe C, Gregori A, Virdi M. Surgical site infections linked to contaminated surgical instruments. J Hosp Infect 2012;81:231-8.
Su S, Wong G, Shi W, Liu J, Lai ACK, Zhou J, et al
. Epidemiology, genetic recombination, and pathogenesis of coronaviruses. Trends Microbiol 2016;24:490-502.
Wu P, Duan F, Luo C, Qu X, Liang L, Wu K, et al
. Characteristics of ocular findings of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Hubei Province, China. JAMA Ophthalmol 2019;138:575-8.
Xia J, Tong J, Liu M, Shen Y, Guo D. Evaluation of coronavirus in tears and conjunctival secretions of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. J Med Virol 2020;92:589-94.
Sengupta S, Honavar SG, Sachdev MS, Sharma N, Kumar A, Ram J, et al
. All India Ophthalmological Society-Indian Journal of Ophthalmology consensus statement on preferred practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Indian J Ophthalmol 2020;68:711-24.
] [Full text]
Morton HE. Alcohols. In: Block SS, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1983. p. 225-39.
Rubbo SD, Gardner JF, Webb RL. The inactivation of viruses by germicides. Chem Specialists Manuf Assoc Proc 1963;49:116-8.
Rutala WA, Peacock JE, Gergen MF, Sobsey MD, Weber DJ. Efficacy of hospital germicides against adenovirus 8, a common cause of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis in health care facilities. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother 2006;50:1419-24.
Sattar SA, Springthorpe VS, Karim Y, Loro P. Chemical disinfection of non-porous inanimate surfaces experimentally contaminated with four human pathogenic viruses. Epidemiol Infect 1989;102:493-505.
Frobisher M, Sommermeyer L, Blackwell MJ. Studies on disinfection of clinical thermometers. I. Oral thermometers. Appl Microbiol 1973;1:187-94.
Zachary KC, Bayne PS, Morrison VJ, Ford DS, Silver LC, Hooper DC. Contamination of gowns, gloves, and stethoscopes with vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Infect. Control Hosp Epidemiol 2001;22:560-4.
Babb JR, Bradley CR, Deverill CE, Ayliffe GA, Melikian V. Recent advances in the cleaning and disinfection of fibrescopes. J Hosp Infect 1981;2:329-40.
Garcia de Cabo A, Martinez Larriba PL, Checa Pinilla J, Guerra Sanz F. A new method of disinfection of the flexible fibrebronchoscope. Thorax 1978;33:270-2.
Spaulding EH. Alcohol as a surgical disinfectant: Pros and cons of a much discussed topic. AORN J 1964;2:67-71.
Chronister CL, Russo P. Effects of disinfecting solutions on tonometer tips. Optom Vis Sci 1990;67:818-21.
Lingel NJ, Coffey B. Effects of disinfecting solutions recommended by the Centers for Disease Control on Goldmann tonometer biprisms. J Am Optom Assoc 1992;63:43-8.
Soukiasian SH, Asdourian GK, Weiss JS, Kachadoorian HA. A complication from alcohol-swabbed tonometer tips. Am J Ophthalmol 1988;105:424-5.
Rutala WA, Weber DJ. Uses of inorganic hypochlorite (bleach) in healthcare facilities. Clin Microbiol Rev 1997;10:597-610.
Weber DJ, Rutala WA. Occupational risks associated with the use of selected disinfectants and sterilants. In: Rutala WA, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Antisepsis in Healthcare. Champlain, New York: Polyscience Publications; 1998. p. 211-26.
Landau GD, Saunders WH. The effect of chlorine bleach on the esophagus. Arch Otolaryngol 1964;80:174-6.
Ward MJ, Routledge PA. Hypernatraemia and hyperchloraemic acidosis after bleach ingestion. Hum Toxicol 1988;7:37-8.
Ingram TA. Response of the human eye to accidental exposure to sodium hypochlorite. J Endodontics 1990;16:235-8.
Haag JR, Gieser RG. Effects of swimming pool water on the cornea. JAMA 1983;249:2507-8.
Dychdala GR. Chlorine and chlorine compounds. In: Block SS, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001. p. 135-57.
Gerba CP, Rusin P. Relationship between the use of antiseptics/disinfectants and the development of antimicrobial resistance. In: Rutala WA, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization and Antisepsis: Principles and Practices in Healthcare Facilities. Washington, DC: Association for Professional in Infection Control and Epidemiology; 2001. p. 187-94.
Lee DH, Miles RJ, Perry BF. The mycoplasmacidal properties of sodium hypochlorite. J Hyg (Lond) 1985;95:243-53.
Rutala WA, Cole EC, Wannamaker NS, Weber DJ. Inactivation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium bovis by 14 hospital disinfectants. Am J Med 1991;91:267S-71S.
Perez J, Springthorpe S, Sattar SA. Activity of selected oxidizing microbicides against spores of Clostridium difficile: Relevance to environmental control. Am J Infect Control 2005;33:320-5.
Nagington J, Sutehall GM, Whipp P. Tonometer disinfection and viruses. Br J Ophthalmol 1983;67:674-6.
Romano MR, Montericcio A, Montalbano C, Raimondi R, Allegrini D, Ricciardelli G, et al
. Facing COVID-19 in ophthalmology department. Curr Eye Res 2020;45:653-8.
Lai MYY, Cheng PKC, Lim WWL. Survival of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:e67-71.
Gunaydin M, Esen S, Karadag A, Unal N, Yanik K, Odabasi H, et al
. In vitro
antimicrobial activity of Medilox®
super-oxidized water. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 2014;13:29.
Aggarwal R, Goel N, Chaudhary U, Kumar V, Ranjan KP. Evaluation of microbiocidal activity of superoxidized water on hospital isolates. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2010;53:757-9.
] [Full text]
Scott EM, Gorman SP. Glutaraldehyde. In: Block SS, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1991. p. 596-616.
Stonehill AA, Krop S, Borick PM. Buffered Glutaraldehyde – A new chemical sterilizing solution. Am J Hosp Pharm 1963;20:458-65.
Borick PM, Dondershine FH, Chandler VL. Alkalinized glutaraldehyde, a new antimicrobial agent. J Pharm Sci 1964;53:1273-5.
Russell AD. Glutaraldehyde: Current status and uses. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1994;15:724-33.
Hanson PJ, Bennett J, Jeffries DJ, Collins JV. Enteroviruses, endoscopy and infection control: An applied study. J Hosp Infect 1994;27:61-7.
Husni L, Kale E, Climer C, Bostwick B, Parker TF, 3rd
. Evaluation of a new disinfectant for dialyzer reuse. Am J Kidney Dis 1989;14:110-8.
Townsend TR, Wee SB, Koblin B. An efficacy evaluation of a synergized glutaraldehyde-phenate solution in disinfecting respiratory therapy equipment contaminated during patient use. Infect Control 1982;3:240-4.
Petersen NJ, Carson LA, Doto IL, Aguero SM, Favero MS. Microbiologic evaluation of a new glutaraldehyde-based disinfectant for hemodialysis systems. Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Organs 1982;28:287-90.
Gundogdu H, Ocal K, Caglikulekci M, Karabiber N, Bayramoglu E, Karahan M. High-level disinfection with 2% alkalinized glutaraldehyde solution for reuse of laparoscopic disposable plastic trocars. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 1998;8:47-52.
Mbithi JN, Springthorpe VS, Sattar SA, Pacquette M. Bactericidal, virucidal, and mycobactericidal activities of reused alkaline glutaraldehyde in an endoscopy unit. J Clin Microbiol 1993;31:2988-95.
Leinster P, Baum JM, Baxter PJ. An assessment of exposure to Glutaraldehyde in hospitals: Typical exposure levels and recommended control measures. Br J Ind Med 1993;50:107-11.
Beauchamp RO, Clair MB, Fennell TR, Clarke DO, Morgan KT, Kari FW. A critical review of the toxicology of Glutaraldehyde. Crit Rev Toxicol 1992;22:143-74.
Corrado OJ, Osman J, Davies RJ. Asthma and rhinitis after exposure to Glutaraldehyde in endoscopy units. Hum Toxicol 1986;5:325-8.
Centers for Disease Control. Symptoms of irritation associated with exposure to glutaraldehyde--Colorado. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1987;36:190-1.
Rubbo SD, Gardner JF, Webb RL. Biocidal activities of glutaraldehyde and related compounds. J Appl Bacteriol 1967;30:78-87.
McCulloch EC, Costigan S. A comparison of the efficiency of phenol, liquor cresolis, formaldehyde, sodium hypochlorite and sodium hydroxide against Eberthella typhi at various temperatures. J Infect Dis 1936;59:281-4.
Sagripanti JL, Eklund CA, Trost PA, Jinneman KC, Abeytra C Jr, Kaysner CA, et al
. Comparative sensitivity of 13 species of pathogenic bacteria to seven chemical germicides. Am J Infect Control 1997;25:335-9.
Favero MS, Bond WW. Chemical disinfection of medical and surgical materials. In: Block SS, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1991. p. 617-41.
Turner FJ. Hydrogen peroxide and other oxidant disinfectants. In: Block SS, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1983. p. 240-50.
Block SS. Peroxygen compounds. In: Block SS, editor. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001. p. 185-204.
Silvany RE, Dougherty JM, McCulley JP, Wood TS, Bowman RW, Moore MB. The effect of currently available contact lens disinfection systems on Acanthamoeba castellanii and Acanthamoeba polyphaga. Ophthalmology 1990;97:286-90.
Moore MB. Acanthamoeba keratitis and contact lens wear: The patient is at fault. Cornea 1990;9:S33-5; discussion S39-40.
Levenson JE. Corneal damage from improperly cleaned tonometer tips. Arch Ophthalmol 1989;107:1117.
Klein M, DeForest A. The inactivation of viruses by germicides. Chem Specialists Manuf Assoc Proc 1963;49:116-8.
Berkelman RL, Holland BW, Anderson RL. Increased bactericidal activity of dilute preparations of povidone-iodine solutions. J Clin Microbiol 1982;15:635-9.
Chang SL. Modern concept of disinfection. Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division, 1971:689-705.
[Table 1], [Table 2]