Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:10:58.649Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of nine surface disinfectants against Candida auris using a quantitative disk carrier method: EPA SOP-MB-35

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2020

D. Joseph Sexton Open the ORCID record for D. Joseph Sexton [Opens in a new window] ,
Rory M. Welsh ,
Meghan L. Bentz ,
Kaitlin Forsberg ,
Brendan Jackson ,
Elizabeth L. Berkow  and
Anastasia P. Litvintseva
D. Joseph Sexton*
Affiliation:
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia
Rory M. Welsh
Affiliation:
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia
Meghan L. Bentz
Affiliation:
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia
Kaitlin Forsberg
Affiliation:
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia
Brendan Jackson
Affiliation:
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia
Elizabeth L. Berkow
Affiliation:
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia
Anastasia P. Litvintseva
Affiliation:
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia
*
Author for correspondence: D. Joseph Sexton, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd, AtlantaGA. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We tested 9 disinfectants against Candida auris using the quantitative disk carrier method EPA-MB-35-00: 5 products with hydrogen peroxide or alcohol-based chemistries were effective and 4 quaternary ammonium compound-based products were not. This work supported a FIFRA Section 18 emergency exemption granted by the US Environmental Protection Agency to expand disinfectant guidance for C. auris.

Type
Concise Communication
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 41 , Issue 10 , October 2020 , pp. 1219 - 1221
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2020 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Forsberg, K, Woodworth, K, Walters, M, et al.Candida auris: the recent emergence of a multidrug-resistant fungal pathogen. Med Mycol 2019;57:1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adams, E, Quinn, M, Tsay, S, et al.Candida auris in healthcare facilities, New York, USA, 2013–2017. Emerg Infect Dis 2018;24:1816–1824.10.3201/eid2410.180649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadnum, JL, Shaikh, AA, Piedrahita, C, et al.Effectiveness of disinfectants against Candida auris and other Candida species. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1240–1243.10.1017/ice.2017.162CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
New guidance on environmental control of Candida auris with antimicrobial pesticides. Environmental Protection Agency website. https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/new-guidance-environmental-control-candida-auris-antimicrobial-pesticides. Published 2017. Accessed October 8, 2019.Google Scholar
Antimicrobial testing methods and procedures: MB-35-00. Environmental Protection Agency website. https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-analytical-methods/antimicrobial-testing-methods-procedures-mb-35-00. Published 2017. Accessed October 8, 2019.Google Scholar
Antimicrobial testing methods and procedures: MB-37-00. Environmental Protection Agency website. https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-analytical-methods/antimicrobial-testing-methods-procedures-mb-37-00. Published 2017, Accessed October 8, 2019.Google Scholar
CDC and FDA antibiotic resistance isolate bank: Candida auris. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. https://wwwn.cdc.gov/ARIsolateBank/Panel/PanelDetail?ID=2. Accessed October 8, 2019.Google Scholar
Rutala, WA, Kanamori, H, Gergen, MF, et al.Susceptibility of Candida auris and Candida albicans to 21 germicides used in healthcare facilities. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2019;40:380–382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welsh, RM, Sexton, DJ, Forsberg, K, et al.Insights into the unique nature of the East Asian clade of the emerging pathogenic yeast Candida auris. J Clin Microbiol 2019;57(4):e00007–19.10.1128/JCM.00007-19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munoz, JF, Welsh, RM, Shea, T, et al.Chromosomal rearrangements and loss of subtelomeric adhesions linked to clade-specific phenotypes in Candida auris. bioRxiv doi: 10.1101/754143 Accessed October 21, 2019.Google Scholar