Cargando…
Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study
BACKGROUND: The objective of this randomized, prospective and controlled study was to investigate the ability of a closed-system transfer device (CSTD; BD-Phaseal) to reduce the occupational exposure of two isolators to 10 cytotoxic drugs and compare to standard compounding devices. METHODS AND FIND...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938267/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27391697 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159052 |
_version_ | 1782441831793950720 |
---|---|
author | Simon, Nicolas Vasseur, Michèle Pinturaud, Marine Soichot, Marion Richeval, Camille Humbert, Luc Lebecque, Michèle Sidikou, Ousseini Barthelemy, Christine Bonnabry, Pascal Allorge, Delphine Décaudin, Bertrand Odou, Pascal |
author_facet | Simon, Nicolas Vasseur, Michèle Pinturaud, Marine Soichot, Marion Richeval, Camille Humbert, Luc Lebecque, Michèle Sidikou, Ousseini Barthelemy, Christine Bonnabry, Pascal Allorge, Delphine Décaudin, Bertrand Odou, Pascal |
author_sort | Simon, Nicolas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The objective of this randomized, prospective and controlled study was to investigate the ability of a closed-system transfer device (CSTD; BD-Phaseal) to reduce the occupational exposure of two isolators to 10 cytotoxic drugs and compare to standard compounding devices. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The 6-month study started with the opening of a new compounding unit. Two isolators were set up with 2 workstations each, one to compound with standard devices (needles and spikes) and the other using the Phaseal system. Drugs were alternatively compounded in each isolator. Sampling involved wiping three surfaces (gloves, window, worktop), before and after a cleaning process. Exposure to ten antineoplastic drugs (cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, dacarbazine, 5-FU, methotrexate, gemcitabine, cytarabine, irinotecan, doxorubicine and ganciclovir) was assessed on wipes by LC-MS/MS analysis. Contamination rates were compared using a Chi(2) test and drug amounts by a Mann-Whitney test. Significance was defined for p<0.05. Overall contamination was lower in the “Phaseal” isolator than in the “Standard” isolator (12.24% vs. 26.39%; p < 0.0001) although it differed according to drug. Indeed, the contamination rates of gemcitabine were 49.3 and 43.4% (NS) for the Standard and Phaseal isolators, respectively, whereas for ganciclovir, they were 54.2 and 2.8% (p<0.0001). Gemcitabine amounts were 220.6 and 283.6 ng for the Standard and Phaseal isolators (NS), and ganciclovir amounts were 179.9 and 2.4 ng (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that using a CSTD may significantly decrease the chemical contamination of barrier isolators compared to standard devices for some drugs, although it does not eliminate contamination totally. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4938267 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49382672016-07-22 Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study Simon, Nicolas Vasseur, Michèle Pinturaud, Marine Soichot, Marion Richeval, Camille Humbert, Luc Lebecque, Michèle Sidikou, Ousseini Barthelemy, Christine Bonnabry, Pascal Allorge, Delphine Décaudin, Bertrand Odou, Pascal PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The objective of this randomized, prospective and controlled study was to investigate the ability of a closed-system transfer device (CSTD; BD-Phaseal) to reduce the occupational exposure of two isolators to 10 cytotoxic drugs and compare to standard compounding devices. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The 6-month study started with the opening of a new compounding unit. Two isolators were set up with 2 workstations each, one to compound with standard devices (needles and spikes) and the other using the Phaseal system. Drugs were alternatively compounded in each isolator. Sampling involved wiping three surfaces (gloves, window, worktop), before and after a cleaning process. Exposure to ten antineoplastic drugs (cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, dacarbazine, 5-FU, methotrexate, gemcitabine, cytarabine, irinotecan, doxorubicine and ganciclovir) was assessed on wipes by LC-MS/MS analysis. Contamination rates were compared using a Chi(2) test and drug amounts by a Mann-Whitney test. Significance was defined for p<0.05. Overall contamination was lower in the “Phaseal” isolator than in the “Standard” isolator (12.24% vs. 26.39%; p < 0.0001) although it differed according to drug. Indeed, the contamination rates of gemcitabine were 49.3 and 43.4% (NS) for the Standard and Phaseal isolators, respectively, whereas for ganciclovir, they were 54.2 and 2.8% (p<0.0001). Gemcitabine amounts were 220.6 and 283.6 ng for the Standard and Phaseal isolators (NS), and ganciclovir amounts were 179.9 and 2.4 ng (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that using a CSTD may significantly decrease the chemical contamination of barrier isolators compared to standard devices for some drugs, although it does not eliminate contamination totally. Public Library of Science 2016-07-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4938267/ /pubmed/27391697 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159052 Text en © 2016 Simon et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Simon, Nicolas Vasseur, Michèle Pinturaud, Marine Soichot, Marion Richeval, Camille Humbert, Luc Lebecque, Michèle Sidikou, Ousseini Barthelemy, Christine Bonnabry, Pascal Allorge, Delphine Décaudin, Bertrand Odou, Pascal Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study |
title | Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study |
title_full | Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study |
title_fullStr | Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study |
title_short | Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study |
title_sort | effectiveness of a closed-system transfer device in reducing surface contamination in a new antineoplastic drug-compounding unit: a prospective, controlled, parallel study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4938267/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27391697 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159052 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT simonnicolas effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT vasseurmichele effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT pinturaudmarine effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT soichotmarion effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT richevalcamille effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT humbertluc effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT lebecquemichele effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT sidikouousseini effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT barthelemychristine effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT bonnabrypascal effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT allorgedelphine effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT decaudinbertrand effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy AT odoupascal effectivenessofaclosedsystemtransferdeviceinreducingsurfacecontaminationinanewantineoplasticdrugcompoundingunitaprospectivecontrolledparallelstudy |