An assessment of seven closed system transfer devices in accordance with the 2015 NIOSH vapor containment performance protocol

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to assess and compare the effectiveness of seven different closed system transfer device (CSTD) product lines following the 2015 NIOSH Vapor Containment Performance Protocol, using a Gasmet™ DX5000 Terra multigas FTIR analyzer.MethodsSeven different CSTD systems were assessed using a two-task evaluation on their capacity to contain the NIOSH-specified challenge agent, 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA). Task 1 simulated reconstitution and compounding steps while Task 2 simulated compounding and administration steps. Vial adapters, syringe adapters, IV bag adapters, and y-site adapters from each CSTD product line were tested. All tasks were performed in a custom-built environmental test chamber as outlined in the 2015 NIOSH protocol, with isopropyl alcohol (IPA) release detected and measured by a Gasmet™ analyzer.ResultsThe BD PhaSeal™ CSTD product line effectively contained IPA vapor during both tasks with a task performance metric of 0.00 ppm for each task. BD PhaSeal™ Optima, Equashield<sup>®</sup>, Yukon Medical Arisure<sup>®</sup>, ICU Medical ChemoLock™, BD Texium™, and ICU Medical ChemoClave™ non-vented CSTDs demonstrated detectable and quantifiable IPA leakage during each task. The leaks occurred at different steps within the protocol, and the amount of IPA vapor detected varied.ConclusionIn this study, one CSTD product line (i.e., PhaSeal™) successfully contained IPA vapor below the Gasmet™ analyzer's limit of quantification (LOQ) for IPA of 0.04 ppm for both Tasks 1 and 2, demonstrating it to be a validated closed system per the study protocol. All other CSTD product lines demonstrated some level of IPA leakage with task performance metrics above the analyzer's LOQ. However, these results tell us little about how well CSTDs contain hazardous drugs (HDs), as a universal HD surrogate for effectively assessing the closedness of all types of CSTDs has yet to be identified.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice
Published
2024-12-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10781552241304638
Primary Topic
Safe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An assessment of seven closed system transfer devices in accordance with the 2015 NIOSH vapor containment performance protocol

Lori T. Armistead, Stephen F Eckel, Michael Stepanovic, Megan A. Earnhart
Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice
Safe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
article

An assessment of seven closed system transfer devices in accordance with the 2015 NIOSH vapor containment performance protocol

Lori T. Armistead, Stephen F Eckel, Michael Stepanovic, Megan A. Earnhart
article en

Abstract

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to assess and compare the effectiveness of seven different closed system transfer device (CSTD) product lines following the 2015 NIOSH Vapor Containment Performance Protocol, using a Gasmet™ DX5000 Terra multigas FTIR analyzer.MethodsSeven different CSTD systems were assessed using a two-task evaluation on their capacity to contain the NIOSH-specified challenge agent, 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA). Task 1 simulated reconstitution and compounding steps while Task 2 simulated compounding and administration steps. Vial adapters, syringe adapters, IV bag adapters, and y-site adapters from each CSTD product line were tested. All tasks were performed in a custom-built environmental test chamber as outlined in the 2015 NIOSH protocol, with isopropyl alcohol (IPA) release detected and measured by a Gasmet™ analyzer.ResultsThe BD PhaSeal™ CSTD product line effectively contained IPA vapor during both tasks with a task performance metric of 0.00 ppm for each task. BD PhaSeal™ Optima, Equashield<sup>®</sup>, Yukon Medical Arisure<sup>®</sup>, ICU Medical ChemoLock™, BD Texium™, and ICU Medical ChemoClave™ non-vented CSTDs demonstrated detectable and quantifiable IPA leakage during each task. The leaks occurred at different steps within the protocol, and the amount of IPA vapor detected varied.ConclusionIn this study, one CSTD product line (i.e., PhaSeal™) successfully contained IPA vapor below the Gasmet™ analyzer's limit of quantification (LOQ) for IPA of 0.04 ppm for both Tasks 1 and 2, demonstrating it to be a validated closed system per the study protocol. All other CSTD product lines demonstrated some level of IPA leakage with task performance metrics above the analyzer's LOQ. However, these results tell us little about how well CSTDs contain hazardous drugs (HDs), as a universal HD surrogate for effectively assessing the closedness of all types of CSTDs has yet to be identified.

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
BD
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Safe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.