Submitted:
16 September 2025
Posted:
17 September 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Selection and Preparation of Microorganisms
2.2. Medical Instruments Used



2.3. Preparation of Solutions
2.4. Culture Media and Neutralizer
2.5. Equipment and Glassware
- ▪
- Stopwatch
- ▪
- Electromechanical shaker, e.g., Vortex mixer
- ▪
- Containers: test tubes, culture bottles, or bottles of suitable capacity
- ▪
- Graduated pipettes with nominal capacities of 10 mL, 1 mL, and 0.1 mL; calibrated automatic pipettes may be used
- ▪
- Petri dishes, 90 mm to 100 mm in diameter
- ▪
- Orbital mechanical shaker
- ▪
- Centrifuge, capable of 3000 rpm
- ▪
- Microscope, preferably phase-contrast type, with at least × 400 magnification
2.6. Contamination Procedure
- Group A: treatment with EC STER (1 min) followed by immersion in neutralizing solution for 5 min
- Group B: autoclave sterilization (135°C, 5 min) in pouches compliant with UNI EN 868-1, 868-3, 868-5
2.7. Preparation of Microorganisms
2.8. Recovery and Counting
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| NCTC | National Collection of Type Cultures |
| ATCC | American Type Culture Collection |
| TSA | Tryptic Soy Agar |
| CFU | Colony-Forming Unit |
| BHIS | Brain Heart Infusion with Supplements |
| ICM | Initial Contamination Microbial load |
References
- Rutala, W\.A.; Weber, D.J. Disinfection and Sterilization in Health Care Facilities: An Overview. Am. J. Infect. Control 2016, 44, e1–e6.
- McDonnell, G.; Russell, A.D. Antiseptics and Disinfectants: Activity, Action, and Resistance. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 1999, 12, 147–179.
- Lerouge, S.; Wertheimer, M.R.; Yahia, L.H. Plasma Sterilization: A Review of Parameters, Mechanisms, and Limitations. Plasma Process. Polym. 2001, 8, 175–188.
- Rogers, J.V.; Sabourin, C.L.; Choi, Y.W.; Richter, W\.R. Evaluation of Ethylene Oxide Sterilization for Medical Devices. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2008, 105, 1643–1651.
- Peracetic acid sterilization of heat-sensitive medical instruments. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 1995, 16, 348–353. [CrossRef]
- Block, C.; Robson, D.; Barrett, S.P. Use of peracetic acid in endoscope disinfection: Evaluation of efficacy and safety. J. Hosp. Infect.1998, 301–307. [CrossRef]
- Baldry, M.G.C.; Fraser, J.A.L. Disinfection with peracetic acid. \J.
- Dukan, S.; Touati, D. Hypochlorous Acid Stress in Escherichia coli: Resistance, DNA Damage, and Comparison with Hydrogen Peroxide Stress. J. Bacteriol. 1996, 178, 6145–6150.
- Block, S.S. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation, 5th ed.; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2001.
- Rossi, F.; et al. Cold Plasma for Medical Device Decontamination: A Systematic Review. J. Hosp. Infect. 2020, 105, 123–134.
- Fridman, G.; et al. Applied Plasma Medicine. Plasma Process. Polym. 2008, 5, 503–533.
- Maillard, J.Y. Bacterial Target Sites for Biocide Action. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2002, 92, 16S–27S.
- Leprat, R.; Michel, M.; Bayon-Auboyer, M.H. Evaluation of a Cold Sterilization System for Dental Instruments. J. Dent. Res. 2018, 97, 1356–1362.
- Bridier, A.; et al. Resistance of Bacterial Biofilms to Disinfectants: A Review. Biofouling 2011, 27, 1017–1032.
- UNI EN 13727:2015. Disinfettanti chimici ed antisettici—Prova quantitativa in sospensione per la valutazione dell’attività battericida in area medica—Metodo di prova e requisiti (fase 2, stadio 1). Ente Italiano di Normazione: Milano, Italia.
- UNI EN 17126:2019. Valutazione dell’attività sporicida dei disinfettanti chimici in ambito medico. Ente Italiano di Normazione: Milano, Italia.
- UNI EN 14476:2019. Prova quantitativa in sospensione per attività virucida in area medica. Ente Italiano di Normazione: Milano, Italia.
- UNI EN 13624:2022. Prova quantitativa in sospensione per attività fungicida e levuricida in campo medico. Ente Italiano di Normazione: Milano, Italia.
- UNI EN 14348:2005. Valutazione dell’attività micobattericida dei disinfettanti chimici. Ente Italiano di Normazione: Milano, Italia.
- UNI EN ISO 9001:2015. Sistemi di gestione per la qualità—Requisiti. Ente Italiano di Normazione: Milano, Italia.
- UNI EN ISO 13485:2021. Dispositivi medici—Sistemi di gestione per la qualità—Requisiti per scopi regolamentari. Ente Italiano di Normazione: Milano, Italia.
- Regolamento (UE) 2017/745 del Parlamento Europeo e del Consiglio, del 5 aprile 2017, relativo ai dispositivi medici.
- Herrmann, H.W.; Henins, I.; Park, J.; Selwyn, G.S. Decontamination of Chemical and Biological Warfare (CBW) Agents Using an Atmospheric Pressure Plasma Jet. Phys. Plasmas 1999, 6, 2284–2289.
- Jeng, D.K.; Woodworth, A.G. Evaluation of a Peracetic Acid-Based Cold Sterilization System for Endoscopes. Am. J. Infect. Control 1990, 18, 244–250.
- Tuttlebee, C.M.; et al. Effect of Disinfectant Exposure on the Physical Properties of Dental Instruments. J. Hosp. Infect. 2002, 52, 244–250.
| Strain | Growth Conditions | Required Inoculum (CFU/mL) |
Inoculum (CFU/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clostridioides difficile (formerly Clostridium difficile) R027 NCTC 13366 | Anaerobic, Tryptic Soy Agar (TSA) | 1.5 – 5.0 x 106 | 1.2 x 102 |
| Bacillus spizizenii (formerly Bacillus subtilis) ATCC 6633 | TSA (1-2 days – 36°C) | 3.1 x 102 | |
| Bacillus cereus ATCC 9634 | 2.2 x 102 |
| Strain | (CFU/ml) | Requirement (CFU/ml) | Compliant |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clostridioides difficile | 1.2 x 102 | 1.0 x 106 CFU/mL | Yes |
| Bacillus spizizenii | 3.1 x 102 | Yes | |
| Bacillus cereus | 2.2 x 102 | Yes | |
| Total | 6.5 x 102 | Yes |
| Strain | (CFU/ml) | Requirement | Compliant |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clostridioides difficile | 2.7 x 104 | 3.0 x 104 – 1.6 x 105 CFU/mL |
Yes |
| Bacillus spizizenii | 3.1 x 104 | Yes | |
| Bacillus cereus | 3.2 x 104 | Yes |
| Strain | Description | Requirement (CFU/mL) |
Results (CFU/mL) |
Compliant |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clostridioides difficile | Method Validation | ≥ 1.2 x 102 | 1.2 x102 | Yes |
| Assessment of neutralizer non-toxicity | Yes | |||
| Neutralizer validation (product neutralization capacity) | Yes | |||
| Bacillus spizizenii | Method Validation | ≥ 3.1 x 102 | 3.1 x102 | Yes |
| Assessment of neutralizer non-toxicity | Yes | |||
| Neutralizer validation (product neutralization capacity) | Yes | |||
| Bacillus cereus | Method Validation | ≥ 2.2 x 102 | 2.2 x102 | Yes |
| Assessment of neutralizer non-toxicity | Yes | |||
| Neutralizer validation (product neutralization capacity) | Yes |
| Initial bacterial suspension (log₁₀ CFU/mL) | Reduction after sterilization (log₁₀ CFU/mL) | Microbial count reduction (log₁₀ CFU/mL): R = log₁ – log₂ |
Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.81 | 6.81 | 6.81 – 6.81 = 0 | Effective |
| Initial bacterial suspension (log₁₀ CFU/mL) | Reduction after sterilization (log₁₀ CFU/mL) | Microbial count reduction (log₁₀ CFU/mL): R = log₁ – log₂ | Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.81 | 6.81 | 6.81 – 6.81 = 0 | Effective |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).