The Experts below are selected from a list of 306 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Shigeru Itoh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
On Sterilization Using the Underwater Shock Wave Under Non-Heating Environment
Volume 4: Fluid Structure Interaction Parts A and B, 2006Co-Authors: Ayumi Takemoto, Asuka Oda, Masayoshi Iwahara, Shigeru ItohAbstract:The establishment of the Sterilization Technology in non-heating environment is requested in the food industry and a lot of other fields. The existing Sterilization Technology using the high pressure is mainly liberating rapid pressure and a lot of loadings. In this research, the Sterilization by a high pressure was tried by using the underwater shock wave caused by explosive. The detonating fuse was detonated with the percussion cap, and the shock wave was generated. Bacillus cereus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Saccharomyces cerevisiae were used. The underwater shock wave barely causes heat. An excellent bactericidal effect of 100% was obtained in the maximum in the experiment that used S. cerevisiae.Copyright © 2006 by ASME
-
Study for Sterilization Technology by Underwater Shock Wave
Emerging Technology in Fluids Structures and Fluid Structure Interactions, 2003Co-Authors: Toshiaki Watanabe, Ayumi Takemoto, Kazuki Harada, Shigeru ItohAbstract:The method of the Sterilization is divided into the thermal Sterilization, the chemical Sterilization and the other non-thermal Sterilization, roughly. Recently, as for the food industry, it pays attention to the non-thermal Sterilization, which little makes the quality of food, a taste, and so on change. Especially, in the seafood industry, non-thermal Sterilization that provides raw food is very important Technology. Therefore, we consider Sterilization by the underwater shock wave. This Technology is thought that it can be applied to not only food industry but also the medical field. The final aim of this study is in confirming the technique of the Sterilization by the underwater shock wave. At first, we carried out experiments, which use detonating cord and coriform (E. coli.) We estimate for a suitable set of explosives and the quantity.Copyright © 2003 by ASME
David J Weber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
gastrointestinal endoscopes a need to shift from disinfection to Sterilization
JAMA, 2014Co-Authors: William A Rutala, David J WeberAbstract:More than 10 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures areperformedannually in theUnitedStates fordiagnosticpurposes, therapeutic interventions, or both.1 Because gastrointestinalendoscopescontactmucosal surfaces,useofacontaminated endoscope may lead to patient-to-patient transmission of potential pathogens with a subsequent risk of infection.1 In this issue of JAMA, Epstein and colleagues2 report findings from their investigation of a cluster ofNewDelhimetalloβ-lactamase (NDM)–producingEscherichia coliassociatedwith gastrointestinal endoscopy that occurred from March 2013 to July2013 inasinglehospital in northeastern Illinois. During the 5-month period, 9 patients with positive cultures for NDM-producing E coli were identified, and a case-control study demonstrated that a history of undergoing an endoscopic procedure at this specific hospital was strongly associatedwithcasesofNDM-producingEcoli.Culturesobtainedfrom the endoscope used on 5 of the case patients yielded anNDMproducingE coli from the elevator channel. The elevator channel is unique to side-viewing endoscopes, most often used to perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The elevator has a separate channel and provides orientation of catheters, guidewires, and accessories into the endoscopicvisual field.Thischannel iscomplex indesignandmay bemore difficult to disinfect completely. TheEcoli isolatewashighlyrelated(>92%)toallcasepatient isolatesbypulsed-fieldgelelectrophoresis.Endoscopereprocessingprocedureswerereviewedandnolapseswereidentified.Further, theautomatedendoscopereprocessor (AER)wasfunctioning correctly and the duodenoscopes were not damaged. The facilitynotified the226patientswhohadpotential exposure to aculture-positiveendoscope.Twenty-sevenadditionalcasepatientswere identifiedbyactivesurveillancewhowerecolonized andhadbeenexposed to aduodenoscope.No additional cases were identifiedafter thehospital changed its endoscope reprocessing from automated high-level disinfection with orthophthalaldehyde to gas Sterilizationwith ethylene oxide. The key concern raised by this study is whether current US endoscope reprocessing guidelines are adequate to ensure a patient-safe gastrointestinal endoscope (one devoid of potential pathogens) or if endoscopeswith their long, narrow channels, right-angle turns,difficult tocleananddisinfectcomponents, andheavymicrobial contamination impossible to reliably high-level disinfect. To examine this concern and offer recommendations, understanding current knowledge on endoscope reprocessing is necessary. First, endoscopes are semicritical devices, which contact mucousmembranesornonintact skin,andrequireat leasthighleveldisinfection.3,4High-leveldisinfectionachievescomplete eliminationof allmicroorganisms, except for smallnumbersof bacterial spores. Because flexible gastrointestinal endoscopic instruments are heat labile, only high-level disinfection with chemical agents or low-temperature Sterilization technologies arepossible.3However, no low-temperature Sterilization Technology is US Food andDrug Administration (FDA)–cleared for gastrointestinal endoscopes such as duodenoscopes. Second,more health care–associated outbreaks and clusters of infection have been linked to contaminated endoscopes thantoanyothermedicaldevice.3,5However,untilnow, these episodes have been traced todeficient practices such as inadequate cleaning, inappropriate disinfection, and damagedendoscopesor flaws in thedesignofendoscopesorAERs.3 In addition, reprocessing failures have led to patient notificationsandblood-bornepathogentesting indozensof instances.6 Third, evidence-based endoscope reprocessing guidelines havebeenpreparedbyprofessionalorganizationsand theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Although some datahavedemonstratedthat rigorousadherencetotheseguidelineswill result in a patient-safe endoscope,3,4 other data have demonstratedthatallof thestepsassociatedwithmanualendoscopereprocessingarerarelyperformedandsomeessentialsteps (eg,brushingallendoscopechannelsandcomponents)arecommonlyskipped.7Endoscopereprocessingwasimprovedwiththe use of AERs becausemost stepswere automated.7 Fourth,endemic transmissionof infectionsassociatedwith gastrointestinal endoscopes may be unrecognized due to inadequate surveillance of outpatient procedures, long lag time between colonization and infection, and a low frequency of clinical infection. Additionally, the risk for some procedures mightbehigher thanothers inwhichnormally sterile areas are contaminated. In the cluster of cases identified by Epstein et al, thepresenceofanunusualpathogen(NDM-producingEcoli) prompted an investigation and subsequent recognition that duodenoscopes were the source of the case patient isolates.2 Fifth, themarginof safetyassociatedwith reprocessingendoscopes isminimal.Endoscopesareheavilycontaminatedwith microbes. The internal channel of gastrointestinal endoscopes may contain 108-10 (8-10 log10) enteric microorganisms.8 The cleaning step in endoscope reprocessing results in a 4 to 6 log10 reduction of microbes and the high-level disinfection step results inanother4to6 log10 reductionofmycobacteria, fora total 8 to 12 log10 reduction ofmicrobes.9 Thus, themargin of safety associated with cleaning and high-level disinfection of gastroRelated article page 1447 Opinion
-
sporicidal activity of a new low temperature Sterilization Technology the sterrad 50 sterilizer
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, 1999Co-Authors: William A Rutala, Maria F Gergen, David J WeberAbstract:This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of a new low-temperature Sterilization system that recently has been cleared by the Food and Drug Administration, the Sterrad 50. Flat stainless steel carriers were inoculated with approximately 10 6 Bacillus stearothermophilus spores. These carriers were placed aseptically in the middle of 40-cm–long stainless steel-lumened test units of varying diameters (1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm). After inoculation, the test units were processed in the Sterrad 50. After Sterilization, the carriers were assayed for growth of the B stearothermophilus spores. Our data demonstrated that the Sterrad 50 was highly effective in killing the B stearothermophilus spores (no positive carriers with 30 tests of each lumen-diameter test unit). The Sterrad 50 is likely to be clinically useful for the Sterilization of heat-sensitive medical equipment.
N Nik A Norulaini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
implementation of the supercritical carbon dioxide Technology in oil palm fresh fruits bunch Sterilization a review
Journal of CO 2 Utilization, 2018Co-Authors: A Mohd K Omar, T Tengku L Norsalwani, M S Asmah, Z Y Badrulhisham, Azhar Mat Easa, Fatehah Mohd Omar, Md Sohrab Hossain, Mark Harris Zuknik, N Nik A NorulainiAbstract:Abstract In palm oil production, Sterilization is a vital process that can affect the quality of the extracted palm oil. The purpose of Sterilization of oil palm fresh fruit bunch (OP-FFB) is to inactivate lipase activity and lipophilic microorganisms, soften the pulp of the fruits and facilitate the stripping process. The current practice of thermal Sterilization in the palm oil industry, which utilizes conventional steam Sterilization, is ineffective for lipase degradation and microbial inactivation in OP-FFB. The conventional steam Sterilization technique operates at temperature 130 °C–160 °C, elevated pressures of 0.15–0.4 MPa, and Sterilization time of 60–90 min. This Sterilization method also requires huge amounts of water, which in turn demand higher energy usage and generates large quantities of palm oil mill effluent. Thus, waterless Sterilization seems as a better option in yielding a high quality palm oil as well as protecting the environment. Supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) has been found to be a promising Sterilization Technology in the inactivation of various enzymes and lipophilic microorganisms. This Technology inactivates enzymes and microorganisms physico-chemically relatively low temperature (≤60 °C) and moderate pressures (8–40 MPa) without generating residual waste. Thus, the application of SC-CO2 bears the potential to sterilize OP-FFB, as a waterless Sterilization Technology. The present review was conducted to assess the possible use of SC-CO2 in OP-FFB Sterilization and make comparisons to the existing OP-FFB Sterilization method. This study also appraises the effectiveness of SC-CO2 in the inactivation of enzymes and microorganisms that lessen the quality the palm oil.
Ayumi Takemoto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
On Sterilization Using the Underwater Shock Wave Under Non-Heating Environment
Volume 4: Fluid Structure Interaction Parts A and B, 2006Co-Authors: Ayumi Takemoto, Asuka Oda, Masayoshi Iwahara, Shigeru ItohAbstract:The establishment of the Sterilization Technology in non-heating environment is requested in the food industry and a lot of other fields. The existing Sterilization Technology using the high pressure is mainly liberating rapid pressure and a lot of loadings. In this research, the Sterilization by a high pressure was tried by using the underwater shock wave caused by explosive. The detonating fuse was detonated with the percussion cap, and the shock wave was generated. Bacillus cereus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Saccharomyces cerevisiae were used. The underwater shock wave barely causes heat. An excellent bactericidal effect of 100% was obtained in the maximum in the experiment that used S. cerevisiae.Copyright © 2006 by ASME
-
Study for Sterilization Technology by Underwater Shock Wave
Emerging Technology in Fluids Structures and Fluid Structure Interactions, 2003Co-Authors: Toshiaki Watanabe, Ayumi Takemoto, Kazuki Harada, Shigeru ItohAbstract:The method of the Sterilization is divided into the thermal Sterilization, the chemical Sterilization and the other non-thermal Sterilization, roughly. Recently, as for the food industry, it pays attention to the non-thermal Sterilization, which little makes the quality of food, a taste, and so on change. Especially, in the seafood industry, non-thermal Sterilization that provides raw food is very important Technology. Therefore, we consider Sterilization by the underwater shock wave. This Technology is thought that it can be applied to not only food industry but also the medical field. The final aim of this study is in confirming the technique of the Sterilization by the underwater shock wave. At first, we carried out experiments, which use detonating cord and coriform (E. coli.) We estimate for a suitable set of explosives and the quantity.Copyright © 2003 by ASME
William A Rutala - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
gastrointestinal endoscopes a need to shift from disinfection to Sterilization
JAMA, 2014Co-Authors: William A Rutala, David J WeberAbstract:More than 10 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures areperformedannually in theUnitedStates fordiagnosticpurposes, therapeutic interventions, or both.1 Because gastrointestinalendoscopescontactmucosal surfaces,useofacontaminated endoscope may lead to patient-to-patient transmission of potential pathogens with a subsequent risk of infection.1 In this issue of JAMA, Epstein and colleagues2 report findings from their investigation of a cluster ofNewDelhimetalloβ-lactamase (NDM)–producingEscherichia coliassociatedwith gastrointestinal endoscopy that occurred from March 2013 to July2013 inasinglehospital in northeastern Illinois. During the 5-month period, 9 patients with positive cultures for NDM-producing E coli were identified, and a case-control study demonstrated that a history of undergoing an endoscopic procedure at this specific hospital was strongly associatedwithcasesofNDM-producingEcoli.Culturesobtainedfrom the endoscope used on 5 of the case patients yielded anNDMproducingE coli from the elevator channel. The elevator channel is unique to side-viewing endoscopes, most often used to perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The elevator has a separate channel and provides orientation of catheters, guidewires, and accessories into the endoscopicvisual field.Thischannel iscomplex indesignandmay bemore difficult to disinfect completely. TheEcoli isolatewashighlyrelated(>92%)toallcasepatient isolatesbypulsed-fieldgelelectrophoresis.Endoscopereprocessingprocedureswerereviewedandnolapseswereidentified.Further, theautomatedendoscopereprocessor (AER)wasfunctioning correctly and the duodenoscopes were not damaged. The facilitynotified the226patientswhohadpotential exposure to aculture-positiveendoscope.Twenty-sevenadditionalcasepatientswere identifiedbyactivesurveillancewhowerecolonized andhadbeenexposed to aduodenoscope.No additional cases were identifiedafter thehospital changed its endoscope reprocessing from automated high-level disinfection with orthophthalaldehyde to gas Sterilizationwith ethylene oxide. The key concern raised by this study is whether current US endoscope reprocessing guidelines are adequate to ensure a patient-safe gastrointestinal endoscope (one devoid of potential pathogens) or if endoscopeswith their long, narrow channels, right-angle turns,difficult tocleananddisinfectcomponents, andheavymicrobial contamination impossible to reliably high-level disinfect. To examine this concern and offer recommendations, understanding current knowledge on endoscope reprocessing is necessary. First, endoscopes are semicritical devices, which contact mucousmembranesornonintact skin,andrequireat leasthighleveldisinfection.3,4High-leveldisinfectionachievescomplete eliminationof allmicroorganisms, except for smallnumbersof bacterial spores. Because flexible gastrointestinal endoscopic instruments are heat labile, only high-level disinfection with chemical agents or low-temperature Sterilization technologies arepossible.3However, no low-temperature Sterilization Technology is US Food andDrug Administration (FDA)–cleared for gastrointestinal endoscopes such as duodenoscopes. Second,more health care–associated outbreaks and clusters of infection have been linked to contaminated endoscopes thantoanyothermedicaldevice.3,5However,untilnow, these episodes have been traced todeficient practices such as inadequate cleaning, inappropriate disinfection, and damagedendoscopesor flaws in thedesignofendoscopesorAERs.3 In addition, reprocessing failures have led to patient notificationsandblood-bornepathogentesting indozensof instances.6 Third, evidence-based endoscope reprocessing guidelines havebeenpreparedbyprofessionalorganizationsand theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Although some datahavedemonstratedthat rigorousadherencetotheseguidelineswill result in a patient-safe endoscope,3,4 other data have demonstratedthatallof thestepsassociatedwithmanualendoscopereprocessingarerarelyperformedandsomeessentialsteps (eg,brushingallendoscopechannelsandcomponents)arecommonlyskipped.7Endoscopereprocessingwasimprovedwiththe use of AERs becausemost stepswere automated.7 Fourth,endemic transmissionof infectionsassociatedwith gastrointestinal endoscopes may be unrecognized due to inadequate surveillance of outpatient procedures, long lag time between colonization and infection, and a low frequency of clinical infection. Additionally, the risk for some procedures mightbehigher thanothers inwhichnormally sterile areas are contaminated. In the cluster of cases identified by Epstein et al, thepresenceofanunusualpathogen(NDM-producingEcoli) prompted an investigation and subsequent recognition that duodenoscopes were the source of the case patient isolates.2 Fifth, themarginof safetyassociatedwith reprocessingendoscopes isminimal.Endoscopesareheavilycontaminatedwith microbes. The internal channel of gastrointestinal endoscopes may contain 108-10 (8-10 log10) enteric microorganisms.8 The cleaning step in endoscope reprocessing results in a 4 to 6 log10 reduction of microbes and the high-level disinfection step results inanother4to6 log10 reductionofmycobacteria, fora total 8 to 12 log10 reduction ofmicrobes.9 Thus, themargin of safety associated with cleaning and high-level disinfection of gastroRelated article page 1447 Opinion
-
sporicidal activity of a new low temperature Sterilization Technology the sterrad 50 sterilizer
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, 1999Co-Authors: William A Rutala, Maria F Gergen, David J WeberAbstract:This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of a new low-temperature Sterilization system that recently has been cleared by the Food and Drug Administration, the Sterrad 50. Flat stainless steel carriers were inoculated with approximately 10 6 Bacillus stearothermophilus spores. These carriers were placed aseptically in the middle of 40-cm–long stainless steel-lumened test units of varying diameters (1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm). After inoculation, the test units were processed in the Sterrad 50. After Sterilization, the carriers were assayed for growth of the B stearothermophilus spores. Our data demonstrated that the Sterrad 50 was highly effective in killing the B stearothermophilus spores (no positive carriers with 30 tests of each lumen-diameter test unit). The Sterrad 50 is likely to be clinically useful for the Sterilization of heat-sensitive medical equipment.