RESUMEN
Purpose The aims of this study were to propose a simple methodology to assess the rinsing volume of syringe extension sets and to compare several marketed devices. Methods A UV-spectrophotometry assay using quinine hydrochloride as drug substitute was developed. Quinine concentration ranged from 20 to 200 µg/ml. The assay was validated with the accuracy profile method and tested on five different assemblies (device+extension sets) with different dead-space volumes (1.28-2.80 ml) and at two different quinine concentrations (0.3 and 8.0 mg/ml). Rinsing was performed stepwise with water for injection until reaching an undetectable quinine concentration. After fitting the data with a Weibull model, assemblies were compared with an ANOVA performed on ranks (GraphPad, La Jolla, USA). Results The within-day and between-day precision ranges were 0.39-0.81 and 0.48-0.84%, respectively. The lower limit of quantification was 4.26 µg/ml. The volume required to completely rinse the infusion line was different according to the initial drug concentration and to the device assessed: from 6 to 10 ml for a low quinine concentration and from 7 to 17 ml for a high quinine concentration. Conclusion This study shows that a simple, cheap and easy-to-use methodology may be used to assess the rinsing volume of syringe extension sets. The rinsing volume is different according to the tested device.
RESUMEN
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 Chi2 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.