4.7 Article

Modeling the supercritical carbon dioxide inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis in human body fluids clinical waste

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 296, 期 -, 页码 173-181

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2016.03.120

关键词

Human blood waste; Infectious waste; Pathogenic bacteria; Sterilization; Supercritical carbon dioxide; Waste management

资金

  1. Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia [203/PTEKIND/6711438, 1002/PJJAUH/910324]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human body fluids clinical waste poses a challenge to healthcare facilities because of the presence of infectious pathogenic microorganisms, leading concern for an effective sterilization method to eliminate the infectious threat for safe handling and disposal. In the present study, the supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) was utilized to sterilize human blood waste with varying pressure and temperature for a treatment time of 5-90 min. Modified Gompertz equation was employed to elucidate Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Bacillus subtilis (B. subtilis-vegetative cell) inactivation curve in SC-CO2 sterilized human blood waste. It was observed that the experimental data was well fitted with the predicted value obtained from modified Gompertz equation. The SC-CO2 sterilization efficiency was compared with the steam autoclave treatment based on bacterial regrowth potential and scanning electron microscope image analyzes. The absence of bacterial regrowth and physicochemical destruction of bacterial cells revealed that SC-CO2 is an efficient sterilization technology to treat human blood waste. Thus, SC-CO2 sterilization method could be utilized to sterilize human blood waste in a healthcare facility to improve hospital hygiene by eliminating infectious exposure of human body fluids clinical waste, and to conduct safe handling and management of human body fluids clinical waste. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据