Search

Introduction: Since 2007, the classification of ethanol under the Biocidal Products Regulation has paradoxically remained unresolved due to conflicting views among experts and authorities. Initially, there was a discussion about classifying ethanol as carcinogenic. The current proposal to extend its harmonized classification includes, among other things, categorizing it as reproductive toxicity category 2 (“suspected to have CMR potential for humans”; carcinogenic, mutagenic, reprotoxic). If ethanol were classified under reproductive toxicity category 2, it would mean that the only active ingredient in hand antiseptics effective against non-enveloped viruses would no longer be available.Scientific assessment of the safety of ethanol-based hand rubs (EBHR): Available epidemiological studies do not confirm an increased risk for cancer from EBHR in exposed individuals, except under uncommon or unlikely routes or levels of exposure.The evidence for ethanol's reprotoxic effect originates from the consumption of alcoholic beverages by pregnant women, where ethanol uptake is incomparably higher. The amount of transdermal ethanol absorption during hand antisepsis is up to ten times lower than the oral intake of beverages containing hidden ethanol, such as apple juice, kefir, or non-alcoholic beer. Blood alcohol levels after using EBHR remain within the physiological range associated with food intake.Conclusion: There is no epidemiological evidence of toxicity for workers handling ethanol-containing products in industry or using EBHR in healthcare settings. Given that the classification of EBHR as reproductive toxicity category 2 is not supported by current scientific research and that no alternative biocidal active substance in hand rubs is effective against non-enveloped viruses, medical associations and expert committees from Europe, the USA, Canada, the Asia-Pacific region, and the World Society for Virology unequivocally recommend, with the highest priority, that EBHR be approved as an active substance for PT1 biocides and not be classified as a reproductive toxicant in category 2.

The approval of ethanol by the Biocidal Products Regulation has been under evaluation since 2007 due to controversial opinions on the risk assessment. Because of this critical situation, 2022 a memorandum was published to verify whether the use of ethanol for hand antisepsis poses any hazard. On the basis of the memorandum a toxicological evaluation of ethanol-based hand rubs is given.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic illustrates the necessity of effective preventive measures for existing and newly emerging pathogens. When confronted with pathogens or spoilage agents, especially if they are not yet well studied, effective hygiene protocols are needed immediately. In the medical field, effective preventive measures are key to prevent vulnerable patients from infections. In production areas, effective hygiene measures are needed to protect goods from spoilage or microbial contamination.The European standardization framework established by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) ensures that effective hygiene measures are available and can be immediately implemented when needed. Based on a broad portfolio of standards/laboratory tests, activity claims specifically addressing the special features of applications of antimicrobial formulations are substantiated. In this review, the concept of using standardized surrogate test organisms is explained, and the European standardized test approach to claim microbicidal and virucidal efficacy, the specificity of claims and their relevance for infection prevention measures is illustrated. Furthermore, relevance of the European Norm test methods is elucidated in the light of legal requirements.Finally, the review explains the systematics of the standardized methodological portfolio of CEN, Technical Committee 216, which is very useful when effective strategies for fighting or preventing microbial and viral induced infections, contaminations or spoilage are needed on an immediate basis.

Aim: Glutaraldehyde (GDA) is an active ingredient in many instrument disinfectants and is effective against a broad spectrum of microorganisms. In the past, the virus-inactivating properties of these products were mainly claimed based on quantitative suspension tests with different test viruses. Recently, however, a European Norm EN 17111:2018 has been published which allows examination of instrument disinfectants in a surface carrier test, simulating practical conditions. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate GDA for the ability to inactivate the viruses used in this European Norm as test viruses. Methods: The virucidal efficacy of GDA as the active ingredient in instrument disinfectants was evaluated with 4 different test viruses in a method simulating practical conditions (EN 17111:2018).Results: With a fixed exposure time of five minutes at 20°C, 100 ppm GDA were necessary to inactivate vaccinia virus, classifying it as a limited spectrum virucidal activity for pre-cleaning products. For adenovirus, 125 ppm GDA were required, whereas for murine norovirus as a surrogate for human norovirus, 4,000 ppm GDA were required for a significant reduction of viral titres. Both non-enveloped viruses must be tested to prove virucidal activity in EN 17111:2018. But even 4,000 ppm were not enough to yield a 4 log reduction of the murine parvovirus at 20°C. This virus is only required as a test virus using this method if temperatures ≥40°C are used. Conclusion: GDA, as the active ingredient of many instrument disinfectants, shows virucidal efficacy at 20°C. The necessary concentrations are strongly dependent on the stability of the test viruses. Due to the high stability of murine norovirus, GDA levels of 4,000 ppm were required to inactivate this virus within the 5-minute exposure time.

Aim: The virucidal efficacy of an automated ultrasound probe disinfector (trophon EPR) was evaluated in a three step procedure according to European and German test methods. This system uses sonicated hydrogen peroxide mist (35%) at elevated temperature (50°C) in a closed chamber with control of all parameters within a 7 minute cycle. Methods: In the first step of examination, the peroxide solution was tested in a quantitative suspension assay according to the Guideline of Deutsche Vereinigung zur Bekämpfung der Viruskrankheiten (DVV) e.V. and Robert Koch-Institute (RKI) and in parallel with the European Norm EN 14476 with all test viruses creating a virucidal claim. In the second step, the virucidal efficacy of the hydrogen peroxide solution was evaluated in a hard surface carrier test according to the Guideline of DVV with adenovirus, murine norovirus and parvovirus simulating practical conditions. Finally, the efficacy was evaluated by the automated system using stainless steel carriers inoculated with test virus and positioned at different levels inside the chamber. Results: A ≥4 log reduction of virus titre was demonstrated with all methods including carrier tests with murine norovirus, adenovirus, and parvovirus using the automated device. Conclusion: The automated device is able to inactivate test viruses of German and European norms and can therefore claim efficacy against human pathogenic enveloped and non-enveloped viruses. This includes human papillomaviruses which form part of the complete virucidal claim.