Human Papillomavirus (HPV)
Risk and Challenges

UV-C High Level Disinfection
is Effective Against HPV

The aim of this study was to determine if UV-C disinfection is efficient in routine clinical conditions, especially against HPV. 1

The study also aimed to compare two protocols usually found in infection prevention practice of endocavity ultrasound probes. The simple protocol consisted of performing LLD with a chemically impregnated wipe on a probe used with a disposable cover. The more rigorous protocol consisted of performing HLD on a visibly clean probe.

The three-step study evaluated ultraviolet-C (UV-C) efficacy against human papillomavirus (HPV) found on vaginal ultrasound probes.

The first two steps evaluated UV-C disinfection of vaginal ultrasound probes.

Overview

The study took place in a high-turnover gynaecological practice (12,000 emergency consultations with 8,000 vaginal ultrasound examinations annually) in a specialized university hospital.

  • It was the first to evaluate UV-C disinfection efficacy against HPV in real conditions when the UV-C system is run within a short time cycle (90 seconds).
  • The results of this study indicated that UV-C can be used to ensure patient safety during ultrasound examinations.
  • The second and third parts confirmed that the LLD procedure alone is unsafe when compared to HLD method such as UV-C that can reliably inactivate HPV. This method is strongly recommended to ensure patient safety.
  • The study demonstrated  the benefit of using the UV-C system: easy to use, effective, safe to the user, and faster than other decontamination systems.
  • The study highlighted the need for standardised solutions that include HPV

Conclusion

UV-C has been confirmed as a relevant and easily adaptable solution to the healthcare environment. 1

  1. Maxime Pichon, Karine Lebail-Carval, Geneviève Billaud, Bruno Lina, Pascal Gaucherand and Yahia Mekki (2019)
    Decontamination of Intravaginal Probes Infected by Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Using UV-C Decontamination System. J. Clin.
    Med, 8, 1776; doi:10.3390/jcm8111776
Scroll to Top