In vitro analysis of nonthermal plasma as a disinfecting agent

Ashlee E. Watts Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.

Search for other papers by Ashlee E. Watts in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Susan L. Fubini Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.

Search for other papers by Susan L. Fubini in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Margaret Vernier-Singer Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.

Search for other papers by Margaret Vernier-Singer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BS
,
Czeslaw Golkowski Super Pulse, 227 Durfee Rd, Ithaca, NY 14850.

Search for other papers by Czeslaw Golkowski in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD
,
Sang Shin Diagnostic Laboratory, Cornell University Hospital for Animals, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.

Search for other papers by Sang Shin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
, and
Rory J. Todhunter Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.

Search for other papers by Rory J. Todhunter in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BVSc, PhD

Abstract

Objective—To determine the effect of nonthermal plasma on Staphylococcus aureus, fibroblasts in monolayer culture, and clean and contaminated skin explants.

Sample Population—Normal skin from euthanized horses.

ProceduresS aureus organisms were plated and treated with nonthermal plasma followed by bacterial culture to assess viability. Fibroblasts in monolayer culture and the epidermal and dermal surfaces of clean and S aureus–contaminated skin explants were treated. The effects of distance and duration on the response to treatment were compared.

Results—Compared with controls, treatment with nonthermal plasma resulted in significantly decreased bacterial growth and significantly inhibited survival of fibroblasts in monolayer culture. When epidermal and dermal surfaces of skin explants were treated, there was no effect on production of normal fibroblasts during explant culture, except when extended exposure times of ≥ 2 minutes were used. Treatment with nonthermal plasma resulted in significantly lower bacterial counts after 24 hours of culture of S aureus–contaminated epidermis but not of dermis.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Nonthermal plasma resulted in bacterial decontamination of agar and epithelium; negative effects on fibroblasts in monolayer; and no negative effects on skin explants, except at long exposure times. Use of nonthermal plasma appears safe for treatment of epithelialized surfaces, may be safe for granulating wounds, and results in decontamination of S aureus. Investigations on the effects that nonthermal plasma may have on patient tissues are indicated with a clinically applicable delivery device.

Abstract

Objective—To determine the effect of nonthermal plasma on Staphylococcus aureus, fibroblasts in monolayer culture, and clean and contaminated skin explants.

Sample Population—Normal skin from euthanized horses.

ProceduresS aureus organisms were plated and treated with nonthermal plasma followed by bacterial culture to assess viability. Fibroblasts in monolayer culture and the epidermal and dermal surfaces of clean and S aureus–contaminated skin explants were treated. The effects of distance and duration on the response to treatment were compared.

Results—Compared with controls, treatment with nonthermal plasma resulted in significantly decreased bacterial growth and significantly inhibited survival of fibroblasts in monolayer culture. When epidermal and dermal surfaces of skin explants were treated, there was no effect on production of normal fibroblasts during explant culture, except when extended exposure times of ≥ 2 minutes were used. Treatment with nonthermal plasma resulted in significantly lower bacterial counts after 24 hours of culture of S aureus–contaminated epidermis but not of dermis.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Nonthermal plasma resulted in bacterial decontamination of agar and epithelium; negative effects on fibroblasts in monolayer; and no negative effects on skin explants, except at long exposure times. Use of nonthermal plasma appears safe for treatment of epithelialized surfaces, may be safe for granulating wounds, and results in decontamination of S aureus. Investigations on the effects that nonthermal plasma may have on patient tissues are indicated with a clinically applicable delivery device.

Contributor Notes

Supported by the Dean's Fund for Clinical Excellence, Cornell University.

Presented in abstract form at the 2006 American College of Veterinary Surgeons Symposium, Washington, DC, October 2006.

Address correspondence to Dr. Fubini.
  • 1

    Eugster S, Schawalder P & Gaschn F, et al. A prospective study of postoperative surgical site infections in dogs and cats. Vet Surg 2004;33:542550.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Benger JR, Kelly AJ, Winson IG. Does early wound infection after elective orthopaedic surgery lead on to chronic sepsis? J R Coll Surg Edinb 1998;43:4344.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    MacDonald DG, Morley PS & Bailey JV, et al. An examination of the occurrence of surgical wound infection following equine orthopaedic surgery (1981–1990). Equine Vet J 1994;26:323326.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Holtom PD, Patzakis MJ. Open fractures and postoperative orthopedic infections. Curr Treat Options Infect Dis 2000;2:208213.

  • 5

    National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004, issued October 2004. Am J Infect Control 2004;32:470485.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Southwood LL, Baxter GM. Instrument sterilization, skin preparation, and wound management. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 1996;12:173194.

  • 7

    Weese JS. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in horses and horse personnel. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2004;20:601613.

  • 8

    Jacobs P, Kowatsch R. Sterrad sterilization system: a new technology for instrument sterilization. Endosc Surg Allied Technol 1993;1:5758.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    3M Health Care. Self-study series, lesson 54: gas plasma sterilization. Saint Paul: 3M Health Care, 2000.

  • 10

    Laroussi M, Alexeff I, Kang WL. Biological decontamination by nonthermal plasmas. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci IEEE Nucl Plasma Sci Soc 2000;28:184187.

  • 11

    Laroussi M, Richardson JP, Dobbs FC. Effects of nonequilibrium atmospheric pressure plasmas on the heterotropic pathways of bacteria and on their cell morphology. Appl Phys Lett 2002;81:772774.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Mendis DA, Rosenberg M, Azam F. A note on the possible electrostatic disruption of bacteria. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci IEEE Nucl Plasma Sci Soc 2000;28:13041306.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Kieft IE, Broers JL & Caubet-Hilloutou V, et al. Electric discharge plasmas influence attachment of cultured CHO K1 cells. Bioelectromagnetics 2004;25:362368.

  • 14

    Soloshenko IA, Tsiolko VV & Khomich VA, et al. Features of sterilization using low-pressure DC-discharge hydrogen-peroxide plasma. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci IEEE Nucl Plasma Sci Soc 2002;30:14401444.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Laroussi M. Nonthermal decontamination of biological media by atmospheric-pressure plasmas: review, analysis, and prospects. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci IEEE Nucl Plasma Sci Soc 2002;30:14091415.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Geiss HK. New sterilization technologies—are they applicable for endoscopic surgical instruments? Endosc Surg Allied Technol 1994;2:276278.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Stoffels E, Flikweert AJ & Stoffels WW, et al. Plasma needle: a non-destructive atmospheric plasma source for fine surface treatment of (bio)materials. Plasma Sources Sci Technol 2002;11:383388.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Stoffels E, Kieft E & Sladek EJ, et al. Towards plasma surgery: plasma treatment of living cells, in Proceedings. 22nd Summer Sch Int Symp Phys Ionized Gases 2004;309314.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Sosnin EA, Stoffels E & Erofeev MV, et al. The effects of UV irradiation and gas plasma treatment on living mammalian cells and bacteria: a comparative approach. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci IEEE Nucl Plasma Sci Soc 2004;32:15441549.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Oda T, Yamaji K, Takahashi T. Decomposition of dilute trichloroethylene by nonthermal plasma processing—gas flow rate, catalyst, and ozone effect. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2004;40:430436.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Freshney RI, ed.Animal cell culture: a practical approach. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Liss Press, 1986;187196.

Advertisement