Disinfectants can act on microorganisms in two different ways: growth inhibition (bacteriostasis, fungistasis) or lethal action (bactericidal, fungicidal or virucidal effects). Only the lethal effects are of interest in disinfection and, as the objects of treatment have no inherent means of defence, lethality is the desired objective. Although microbiologists have been working for mor e than a century on the problems associated with disinfection, understanding of the mode of action of active molecules remains vague: numerous hypotheses exist but few certainties.
Many authors have long maintained that disinfectants and antiseptics act in a non-specific manner, in contrast to antibiotics which have distinct cellular targets within the microorganism. Although many studies still need to be performed in this field, it is clear that this distinction cannot be made for some molecules. The discussion below focuses on the action of a certain number of active molecules. However, disinfectants are usually complex formulations of active molecules, sometimes also containing co-solvents, chelating agents, acidic or alkaline agents, or surface-active or anti-corrosive products.
It should also be noted that there may be considerable variation (in terms of pH, hardness, salinity, etc.) in the media surrounding the target microorganisms, and the state in which the latter is present (e.g. bacterium isolated or included in complex biofilm). Understanding the mode of action of disinfectants requires an examination of the structure and functions of the bacterial cell.
its high environmental toxicity makes desirable to search for alternatives. We compare the antimicrobial activity of 2% glutaraldehyde with 0.44% N-duopropenide (NDP), 0.66% NDP in 48 degrees alcoholic solution (NDP-alc), 0.13% glutaraldehyde-phenate, 1% or 3% persulphate (Virkon) and 0.1% or 0.5% chlorhexidine, using a model that mimics non-regular surface instruments contaminated with microbial strains (44 bacteria, 6 of which were Mycobacterium).
The contaminated carrier is soaked in the disinfectant solution. After 5 or 20 minutes contact the disinfectant is neutralized. The overall results on all microorganisms in 20 minutes, show similar antibacterial activity for 2% glutaraldehyde and 0.66% NDP-alc, followed by 0.44% NDP and after by the two concentrations of Virkon and 0.5% chlorhexidine. The 0.13% glutaraldehyde-phenate and 0.1% chlorhexidine exhibited significantly less effect than any other disinfectant. 0.66% NDP-alc was faster antimicrobial activity than 2% glutaraldehyde, destroying totally the inoculum in 5 minutes.
Activity on Mycobacterium showed great differences between 2% glutaraldehyde and the rest of products (> 5 log versus < 3 log reduction in 20 minutes), with an exception: NDP-alc, with similar and faster activity (> 5 log in 5 minutes) than 2% glutaraldehyde. With human blood, the survival microorganisms increase 0.3 log (average) in all the disinfectants used. The aggressiveness on metallic devices was greater in Virkon than in the other disinfectants. We conclude that NDP (alone or in alcoholic solution) may be a good alternative to glutaraldehyde in hospital instruments disinfection.
DISINFECTANTS
AND
PRODUCTION PROCESS
AND
PRODUCTION PROCESS
MANUFACTURING PROCESS OF DISINFECTANTS is not very complicated. For the production, there is need usable and tried a formulation, raw materials and mixing tank. For raw materials to be used, quantities to be used and ingredients usage rankings, you should look into this formulation. Therefore, formulation and productıon methods of disinfectant solutions are important. If you have not a good formulation, you cannot make healthy and efficient production of any disinfectant products and derivatives.
DISINFECTANT PRODUCTS FORMULATIONS ENCYCLOPEDIA
|
|
|
|
|
|