Optimizing EtO
SterilizationThe use of advanced monitoring technologies in four key aspects of EtO
sterilization can yield substantial business and regulatory benefits.
Paul J. Sordellini,
Frank R. Bonanni, and Gregory A. Fontana
|
The use
of ethylene oxide (EtO) gas has long been a dominant mode of terminal
sterilization. Today, close to half of all medical devices produced in
the United States are processed with EtO. But while it remains a popular
method of sterilization, the pressures of global competition demand
greater cost-effectiveness and flexibility of the process. At the same
time, compliance with regulatory requirements must be maintained.
Fortunately,
the application of spectroscopic and electronic analytical equipment
during process development, validation, and operation is allowing EtO
users to increase the efficiency and efficacy of the process while
reducing turnaround times, labor requirements, and raw material use. To
gain these improvements, EtO users are focusing on four key areas:
|

The DataTrace system from Mesa Labs measures process temperature,
pressure, and humidity. |
- Releasing product parametrically.
- Managing product load configuration within validated parameters.
- Adopting new products into already-validated product families.
- Determining process equivalency across multiple sterilizers.
Correctly implemented, programs addressing these areas will increase
productivity, reduce costs, and yield a more controlled process. At the same
time, manufacturers will have increased flexibility to adjust their
sterilization practices quickly in response to changing market conditions.
PROCESS MONITORING TECHNOLOGY
When a chemical process is developed and validated, the resulting data are
used to establish and verify the acceptable range for each of the critical
process parameters. Process repeatability is therefore predicated on the routine
control of each parameter within the validated ranges. The simplest and most
accurate way of verifying process conformance is to directly monitor each
critical parameter and then compare the data collected during and after
processing to the validated specifications.
 |
Direct
analytical technology using nondispersive mid-infrared (NDIR)
spectroscopy allows the real-time simultaneous monitoring of headspace
water vapor and EtO concentrations during an EtO sterilization
process. An analyzer with the ability to measure 0300 mg/L of water
vapor and 01200 mg/L of EtO, and to operate at 070°C whether
above or below atmospheric pressure, can be mounted on an EtO
sterilizer to confirm process conformance with minimum validated
parameters.
Proper
design and installation of a direct EtO sterilizer gas analyzer
requires selection of an appropriate sample point from which analyte
gases are drawn.1 Provided that a sterilizer has ample
internal recirculation to minimize stratification, a single sample
point is sufficient to obtain a gas stream representative of the
process conditions. The current standard makes no mention of a minimum
number of either sample points or a sampling frequency. As a result,
the user can be asked to justify the selected locations and sampling
plan.
|
| The
EOS-200 from Spectros Instruments Inc. (Whitins-ville, MA) uses a
nondispersive infrared analyzer. |
The optimum
position from which to sample is toward the top of the sterilizer.
Stratification, if it occurred, would result in the heavier gas settling toward
the bottom of the sterilizer. Therefore the first signs of stratification caused
by recirculation obstruction or failure would appear as lower-than-expected EtO
gas concentrations beginning in the top of the headspace. By attaching a length
of flexible tubing to the sample port, the port can effectively be moved around
the sterilizer during a series of identical cycles. In this way different areas
of the sterilizer may be analyzed for comparison and the most challenging
location identified and documented for regulatory review. A report can then be
generated showing details of gas distribution throughout the chamber.
External sample
lines are sealed and heated to prevent leakage and condensation. In proximity to
the sample point, the analyzer may have independent pressure and temperature
sensors. Besides providing data for the gas analysis, these extra sensors can be
used as a redundant process monitoring system. The results can be compared with
the pressure and temperature data recorded by the sterilizer's main control
system.
The user who
reduces the definition of parametric release to simply replacement of
biological indicators (BIs) with a gas analyzer is throwing away the opportunity
to achieve an unprecedented level of process control, process optimization, and
final assurance of sterility. With appropriate modifications to the sterilizer
hardware and control software, the scope of process-gas analysis can be expanded
from simply monitoring headspace gases to actually controlling the addition and
maintenance of process-gas concentrations.
A data feedback
loop, where concentration data from the analyzer are ported directly to the
command logic of the sterilizer controller, allows the user to deliver accurate
levels of water vapor and EtO to the process. Using this approach, processes can
be developed and maintained to within ±4 mg/L. Direct gas analysis eliminates
the concern of EtO depletion during sterilant dwell. EtO gas makeup is automated
and controlled to add compensatory sterilant whenever the concentration drops
due to load absorption. It must be noted that while this approach works with
pure EtO systems, EtO-diluent systems (EtO/CO2, for example) safety
features to avoid over pressurization during makeup.
All measurement
and test equipment that may directly or indirectly affect the quality of process
output must be routinely calibrated.2,3 Analytical hardware for water
vapor and EtO measurement must be calibrated to bracket the full gas
concentration range specified in the sterilizer operational qualification
manual. Calibration efforts can be aided by infrared (IR) detectors that
automatically (e.g., at the start of each cycle) switch to a stable and constant
blank reference gas in situ for background correction. Based on the user's
selection, the analyzer automatically isolates itself from the sterilizer by
closing the sample intake valve and then proceeds to flush the gas cell with
nitrogen. Nitrogen, like all other diatomic molecules, has no IR absorption,
making it the most secure method of rezeroing a gas analyzer. The nitrogen,
making up 100% of the volume of the gas cell, is optically scanned and provides
the instrument with a true zero reference for both water vapor and EtO detectors
to read.
This type of
self-referencing analyzer uses the spectrum from the blank signal as a zero in
calculating the absorbency units, thus allowing for the automatic correction of
drift in the system. Any technology that is unable to self-reference a blank
reference gas will require a more-stringent calibration schedule and procedures
to constantly correct drift. Drift is inherent to all IR, chromatographic, and
electronic sensors.
During validation
of all minimum and maximum parameters, the headspace EtO level is measured at
intervals (e.g., every 1 to 5 minutes) throughout the entire phase of gas
contact. This generates an EtO concentration profile. What is characterized,
especially in those processes that use a single-charge method, is the EtO
affinity of that particular challenge load. Typically, sterilant dwell will
begin with EtO at its highest concentration. As the gas permeates all levels of
packaging in the load, the concentration profile decays, reaching its minimum at
the end of sterilant dwell. The EtO concentration decay is related to the
process set-point program and the totality of the physical attributes of the
load. Therefore, gas profiling during validation will yield an acceptable
minimum-maximum range for EtO concentration.
If an EtO profile
exhibits excessive decay during routine processing, post processing data review
will detect the condition, quantify it, and possibly reject the cycle for
falling outside validated parameters. A direct headspace-gas analyzer, when
properly designed, can consistently measure both process gases with an accuracy
of ±2% full scale or better. Even small variations in load absorbency can be
detected in real time, allowing the user to quantify the impact that variations
in load configuration of any magnitude have on the process. Sample charts and
graphs showing the anatomy of a pure EtO process are presented in Figures 14.
| For
processes that add makeup EtO during sterilant dwell in an attempt to
compensate for EtO that migrates into the load, direct gas analysis
improves process control, safety, and product quality. Typically, in
this approach, any decrease in headspace pressure triggers the addition
of EtO. With continuous direct analysis, the user can distinguish
between pressure loss due to temperature fluctuations, water-vapor loss
through condensation on the load and sterilizer surfaces, and pressure
loss due to true migration of EtO into the load. Interfacing the gas
analyzer with the sterilizer control system allows the addition of EtO
to take place only when the headspace EtO concentration truly decreases.
Adding EtO to compensate for a drop in temperature or condensation of
water vapor can increase EtO chemical residues on the product, which
will require longer aeration times. |
|
|
Figure
1. Example of an EtO set-point graph.
|
PACKAGE
MONITORING TECHNOLOGY
 |
The object
of an EtO sterilizer is to heat, humidify, and expose all product
surfaces to EtO gas for a specified time. This is achieved primarily
by effecting pressure and temperature changes in the sterilizer
headspace. Process elements introduced into the headspace act
physically on the load to bring forth the conditions inside each
primary package necessary to achieve a targeted sterility assurance
level (SAL). In essence, the microenvironment inside every single
primary package included in a load becomes an individual sterilization
chamber. Direct characterization and documentation of the minimum
required levels of heat, water vapor, and EtO concentration that must
integrate inside the primary packaging in order to sterilize a device
to a specific SAL are the keys to achieving advanced process control.
Again, the interests of science, regulatory compliance, and business
can all be well served through the implementation of technology, this
time on a primary-packaging level.
|
| Figure
2. Example of a graph showing percentage volume of air. |
Early attempts at
process monitoring practices were incomplete. Technology offered BIs that could
be sealed inside the primary package to confirm lethality, and thermocouples
that could be attached to the packaging to monitor the product temperature.
Water vapor and EtO concentrations inside the packaging could be inferred to be
sufficient only by negative BI growth, but were rarely measured in situ during
the entire process.
In 1994 the
United States adopted ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11135 as the new sterilization standard.4
For the first time, verification of product level humidity became a requirement
during all validations.5 Because most users sterilized with pure EtO,
temperature/humidity sensors were eventually developed to comply with the new
practice. Because EtO inside the package was still practically impossible to
measure, however, BIs continued to serve as the final process indicator.
| The
implementation of an additional package-level sensor, together with the
previously mentioned water vapor sensor and BIs, now makes it possible
to individually monitor each of the critical process parameters from
within the load and create simultaneous profiles of headspace and load
conditions. At the end of in-chamber conditioning dwell, the pressure
inside the product packaging is at equilibrium with that of the
sterilizer headspace. The next phase consists of the vaporization of EtO
into the sterilizer. |
|
|
Figure
3. Example of a volumetric profile.
|
As EtO gas is
added to the sterilizer headspace, the sterilizer control system will
immediately detect and monitor the headspace pressure rise. As the gas
penetrates the load, the pressure sensors inside product packaging will detect
and record the pressure rise. The time lag between the pressure rise in the
sterilizer head-space and the resulting pressure rise inside the product
packaging will depend on and characterize the physical load attributes.
 |
By
simultaneously monitoring the headspace pressure rise during the
addition of EtO and the pressure rise inside select pallet locations,
the user can determine the rate of penetration into specific products.
The matrix of EtO pressure data will reveal the relationship between
the headspace pressure rise and the rise occurring inside the selected
combinations of products and packaging studied. During process
development this information helps estimate the exposure time needed
to inactivate qualified BIs placed in the most difficult
product/packaging type. In addition, differences in delivered
parameters due to pallet location within the sterilizer are also
identified.
|
| Figure
4. Example of a partial pressure profile. |
PARAMETRIC
RELEASE
Parametric
release of EtO-sterilized product is defined as "declaring product as
sterile, based on physical or chemical process data rather than on the basis of
sample testing or biological indicator testing."4 The
alternative--conventional product release--requires the routine placement of BIs
throughout the load. The BIs are retrieved following processing and tested for
up to 7 days before the load is released to market. The main difference between
parametric and conventional release is the number of process parameters directly
measured.
In conventional
release, the user directly measures the time of each phase, the pressure
throughout the process, and the headspace temperature. The remaining two
critical parameters, headspace water vapor and EtO concentrations, can be
quantified indirectly by thermodynamic calculation based on pressure rise and
temperature.6 Acceptance of the two indirectly measured gas
concentrations is supported by the negative growth of the exposed BIs. Thus the
BI data serve as a process parameter integrator that confirms delivery of
appropriate levels of heat, water vapor, and EtO concentrations.
Parametric
release, in compliance with the current international sterilization standards,
yields an immediate return on the investment by increasing the productivity of
the manufacturer and the sterilization operation. Given a choice, good science
would choose direct real-time monitoring of all critical process parameters.
Business logic would agree: releasing product parametrically the moment it
completes aeration saves both the time and the materials needed to routinely
place, retrieve, and test BIs. In some cases this represents a reduction in
turnaround time of as much as a week, bringing a significant decrease in
inventory requirements for the manufacturer.
It is important
to realize that from a scientific and regulatory point of view, the technology
needed for parametric release also increases the quality of sterilization
process monitoring and the degree of process control. The BI data, as used in
conventional release methods, will detect only gross process failures. They will
not reveal small drifts in the performance of the processing system or
reductions of delivered lethality due to interfering factors, such as variations
in load configuration. The achievement of an SAL cannot be empirically supported
with BI test results. The way to scientifically confirm that each and every
process delivers the required SAL is to directly measure all parameters that
influence the SAL and then compare the data with those collected during
validation. Routine processes, proven empirically to meet or exceed every
minimum requirement set forth by the validation, will deliver the required SAL
for release to market. The jump in the quality of EtO sterilization process
control is what sets direct process analysis apart from biological process
compliance monitors.
LOAD
CONFIGURATION CONTROL
For device
manufacturers with an extensive product catalog or customized multicomponent
products, the master product family may include any combination of thousands of
different items. During routine production, an almost infinite number of
different sterilizer load configurations are possible. That is, loads may differ
from one another in density, product material characteristics, packaging
material type, and quantity.
All potential
side effects originating from the attributes of every different load
configuration must be identified and evaluated during process development in
order for a maximum challenge load to be assembled for validation purposes. The
logic is that once a process is validated for the most challenging load
configuration, every different load configuration generated during routine
production will be equally or less challenging and therefore will respect the
conditions established by the validation.
Variations in
load configuration can occur daily and may influence the efficacy of the
sterilization process or cause a particular product lot to absorb a level of
heat, humidity, or EtO that falls outside the validated ranges. Certain
packaging materials are more difficult to permeate than others. Certain product
materials are more difficult to heat or humidify. Certain loads have a higher
density and require a greater sterilizer heating capacity. A welcome by-product
of parametric release is that the user has the tools to scientifically verify
that every different load configuration placed inside the sterilizer does not
exceed the physical demands of the challenge presented during validation.
Once a direct gas
analyzer is installed and programmed to routinely profile sterilant dwell,
routine data monitoring and review simply involves comparing the EtO
concentration profile for each routine process with the validated profile to
verify that the minimum and maximum validated concentrations were within
tolerance. Each time a different load configuration is presented for processing,
the material constitution is compared with that represented in the validation.
In cases where a load configuration appears to differ significantly from the
validation load, product temperature, humidity, and pressure sensors are placed
inside primary packages and then distributed throughout the load, occupying
positions that were monitored during the validation.
Following
processing of this new load configuration, data detailing headspace temperature,
water vapor, and EtO concentrations are compared with the resulting packaging
levels of those concentrations. This data set, when compared with the headspace
and product data obtained during validation, will allow the user to determine
empirically whether the validated process continues to deliver the same minimum
required process parameters to the product. If so, then the new load
configuration is recorded in an amendment to the validation report and further
monitoring is no longer necessary.
As more new load
configurations are generated, monitored, and equated to the validated load
configuration, significant historical data are created. Eventually, enough
varying load configurations will have been tested and documented so that no
further packaging-level monitoring of water vapor and EtO will be needed.
Routine parametric release can then continue with the requirement of product
temperature verification as prescribed in the requirement section of ANSI/AAMI/ISO
11135-1994.
With parametric
release and the accompanying ability to monitor and evaluate load configuration
influences, the sterilization operation upgrades the quality of process control.
Manufacturing operations can vary load configuration according to market demands
and regulatory bodies can be presented with a scientifically sound system for
justifying the freedom exercised in building constantly changing product loads.
PRODUCT
ADOPTION
Expansion of the
medical device industry may bring frequent modifications to existing products
and the development of new product lines. The most efficient way to deal with
this growth is to allow new products (candidate products) to be quickly added to
an existing sterilization product family (cycle group) already covered by a
validated EtO process.
Following a
program of product adoption, a candidate product is added to an existing cycle
group after a thorough assessment of its physical and chemical characteristics
and comparison with the other members of the cycle group. This is a documented
study performed by a person with appropriate sterilization experience, and may
include different degrees of physical, chemical, and microbiological testing to
assess the product's suitability for the adoption. Provided that the candidate
product is no more challenging to the penetration of heat, water vapor, and EtO
than the original validation challenge, and that the product bioburden is no
more difficult to sterilize than the indicator organism, product adoption into a
cycle group is acceptable and becomes an important tool used to cope with
business growth.
By distributing
physical-microbiological test packs (PMTPs) throughout a validation load, a user
can characterize the complete set of physical parameters delivered to the
product site and correlate these conditions to the delivered lethality. A PMTP
consists of a primary package containing a challenge product, a BI placed in the
product location that is most difficult to sterilize, and a humidity/temperature
and a pressure/temperature data logger both placed adjacent to the BI location.
The PMTP is assembled and packaged under routine manufacturing conditions.
Depending on the size of the load, a number of packs are seeded into the pallets
so as to monitor an efficient selection of locations. The data loggers are
programmed to monitor conditions at predetermined time intervals and store the
data in nonvolatile memory.
Following
completion of the process, the test packs are removed for analysis. The BI
incubation results will map the delivered lethality throughout each pallet and
the sterilizer. The humidity/temperature data will reveal the amount of water
vapor and heat associated with the lethality achieved at each location. The user
will see the amount of heat and humidity added as a result of preconditioning,
the amount of heat and humidity lost during in-sterilizer air removal, the
amount of heat and humidity added during the conditioning phase, and the heat
added during sterilant dwell. The uniformity of the heat and water vapor
distribution will also be charted. In this way, distribution variations can be
attributed either to the product or packaging (in heterogeneous loads) or the
physical pallet location within the sterilizer.
Monitoring
pressure within the primary package to characterize gas penetration rates
represents a novel and important aspect of this exercise. The user first
identifies the start and stop times for EtO addition and sterilant dwell as
recorded by the sterilizer. From this, a headspace EtO concentration profile can
be derived, either by thermodynamic calculation using the EtO pressure rise and
temperature, or through direct gas analysis in the case of parametric release.7
The pressure profile for the same two time periods is then extracted from each
package-level pressure sensor. Package-level gas penetration can be revealed.
The headspace
pressure and concentration profiles and the package pressure profiles can be
overlapped, enabling the user to characterize the migration of gas from the
moment it enters the headspace to the moment it penetrates across each pallet
and enters the primary packaging. This type of headspace-and-product comparative
study will reveal and quantify all the physical conditions inside the primary
packaging that achieve the resulting level of sterility. For the first time, the
user will be able to characterize with complete sets of data the degree of
physical resistance that a particular product-package configuration and
process-challenge device (or test pack) offers to the three physical elements of
the sterilization process (heat, water vapor, and EtO).
Useful
information derived from this study is headspace-product hysteresis, that is,
the time lag exhibited by the load and process-challenge devices in reacting to
physical changes made to the sterilizer atmosphere (addition and removal of heat
and both process gases).
To aid in
adopting a new product, package, or load configuration into a validated cycle
group, the user needs to include the new candidate product in a routine process.
An appropriate number of PMTPs, using the candidate product, are distributed
throughout the load. Following processing, the PMTP data can be compared with
the same data collected during the original validation of the cycle group.
If the validated
process is shown to successfully deliver to the candidate product the same
levels of heat and water vapor, and gas penetration rates are similar to those
in the validation, this lends support to the adoption. If the candidate product
turns out to pose more of a physical challenge than validated products, the user
needs to construct a microbiological validation to complete the adoption.
Finally, the candidate product is tested to confirm product functionality,
package integrity, and chemical residuals. It is then added to the cycle group.
PROCESS
EQUIVALENCY
Increases in
production volumes can exceed the capacity of a validated preconditioning room,
sterilizer, and aeration room. Manufacturers need to efficiently expand the
sterilization of a cycle group to additional rooms and sterilizers that can be
proven equivalent to the validated site in their ability to deliver minimum
validated parameters to the primary package environment. This is achieved
through a scientific program of process reproducibility that is more commonly
referred to as process equivalency.
By implementing
the sensor technology described in this article, EtO process development will
yield a complete set of physical parameters that are confirmed to achieve a goal
at the primary packaging level. Validation then confirms the acceptability of
the results and the repeatability of the process. The actual parameters
programmed into the sterilizer (heat, water vapor, and EtO additions) as well as
the physical characteristics of the equipment (recirculation, heat medium,
capacity) have no importance independent of what resulting conditions are
delivered inside the primary packaging.
Once a cycle
group is validated in a particular sterilizer (the predicate sterilizer) using
the two-tier process and package-level monitoring described herein, additional
sterilizers (candidate sterilizers) can be certified equivalent. They must be
able to deliver to the primary packaging the same minimum process parameters as
detailed in the validation of the predicate sterilizer. To verify this
capability, the same load configuration as employed in the original cycle group
validation is used in the candidate sterilizer. PMTP packs are assembled and
distributed throughout the load according to the validation pattern. Following
processing, the BIs will confirm delivered lethality and the physical sensors
will characterize the heat, water vapor, and gas penetration to the primary
packaging.
Any candidate
preconditioning room proven to deliver the same levels of heat and water vapor
to the product site can be considered for equivalency. Each candidate sterilizer
proven to deliver the same minimum levels of heat, water vapor, and EtO to the
product site can also be considered for equivalency. In addition, each aeration
room proven to deliver the minimum level of heat to the product site can be
considered for equivalency. Whether or not candidate equipment is physically
comparable and programmed identically to the validated predicate equipment is
not always important. The final SAL of a processed load is based solely on the
successful delivery of a specific set of physical conditions to all product
surfaces.
CONCLUSION
Ethylene oxide
has been used as a medical device sterilant for the better part of a century.
Although advances have been made in computer-controlled automation and worker
safety, achieving the increased process flexibility and improved process
economics necessary to meet changing business demands has often conflicted with
the requirements of both scientific and regulatory authorities. New technology
that details process parameters as they are delivered to the sterilizer
headspace and the primary packaging can assure the industry that EtO will
continue to be the sterilant of choice.
Once a cycle
group is validated using direct analysis of headspace gas and ample distribution
of PMTPs, the resulting data can be used to implement scientifically sound
programs of parametric release, load configuration control, product adoption,
and process equivalency. The completeness of the data collected in the
validation and the scientific nature of each optimization program enable users
to respond with confidence to all regulatory bodies, as every conclusion is
supported by integral sets of empirical data. The result is a harmonious
relationship between sterilization, manufacturing, and the regulatory
authorities. Management of EtO sterilization services can now respond more
quickly than before to changes in market demands.
REFERENCES
1. Paul J
Sordellini, "Speeding EtO-Sterilized Products to Market with Parametric
Release," Medical Device & Diagnostic Industry 19, no. 2
(1997): 6780.
2. Cheryl A Boyce, "Guidance on the New QS Regulation Calibration
Requirements," The Validation Consultant 4, no. 7 (1997): 1214.
3. Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR Part 820, "Quality System
Regulations."
4. Medical Devices—Validation and Routine Control of Ethylene Oxide
Sterilization, AAMI/ANSI/ISO 11135 (Arlington, VA: AAMI, 1994).
5. AAMI/ANSI/ISO 11135, (Arlington, VA: AAMI, 1994), sects. 5.3.4, 5.5.2.1, and
5.5.2.2.
6. Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Equipment, Process Considerations, and
Pertinent Calculations, AAMI TIR No. 15-1997 (Arlington, VA: AAMI, 1998).
7. AAMI TIR No. 15-1997(Arlington, VA: AAMI, 1998), sect. 6.0.
Photo courtesy
of Mesa Laboratories
Copyright ©2001 Medical
Device & Diagnostic Industry