UV‐C LED Disinfection of Flexible Rhinolaryngoscopes: Microbiological, Economic, Environmental, and Legislative Evaluation
5 affiliations
- 1Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Ghent University Ghent Belgium
- 2Department of Otorhinolaryngology Ghent University Hospital Ghent Belgium
- 3Laboratory of Medical Microbiology Ghent University Hospital Ghent Belgium
- 4Laboratory of Liver Infectious Diseases, Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Ghent University Ghent Belgium
- 5Department of Electronics and Information Systems IBiTech, Ghent University Gent Belgium
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the microbiological efficacy of the Ray‐Two ultraviolet‐C (UV‐C) light‐emitting diode (LED) chamber for reprocessing flexible rhinolaryngoscopes in otorhinolaryngology (ORL) practice and compare its economic and ecological impacts with chemical high‐level disinfection using the Tristel Trio Wipes System (TTWS). Methods In a prospective study at a tertiary ORL center, bacterial contamination was assessed on 20 flexible rhinolaryngoscopes immediately after routine posterior rhinoscopy and/or laryngoscopy. Paired swab samples were collected from the distal 10–12 cm shaft pre‐ and post‐reprocessing: manual pre‐cleaning with tap water followed by a 4‐min UV‐C LED cycle. Samples were cultured on TSA‐5% sheep blood agar for 36 h at 35°C–37°C, with colony‐forming units (CFUs) enumerated. Per‐cycle costs and carbon footprints were calculated via life cycle assessment (ISO 14040/14044) and compared with TTWS, based on 5000 annual procedures. Results Pre‐reprocessing median CFUs (IQR; range) were 15 (3–27; 2 to > 200), reducing to 0 (0–0; 0–1) post‐UV‐C (p < 0.001; > 99% reduction; 19/20 samples sterile). UV‐C per‐cycle cost was €0.56 (vs. €8.32 for TTWS; 93% savings), with a carbon footprint of 6.81 g CO2e (vs. 115.8 g; 94% reduction). Annual savings: €38,800 and 548 kg CO2e. Conclusion The Ray‐Two UV‐C LED chamber achieves near‐complete bacterial elimination (100% in 19/20 samples; 1 residual CFU in 1/20 samples) on flexible rhinolaryngoscopes, with superior cost‐efficiency and sustainability versus TTWS. This mercury‐free, point‐of‐care method supports greener ORL practice amid evolving EU and US state‐level regulations on mercury‐containing lamps, enhancing infection control without compromising efficacy.
Related
- Effectiveness of ultraviolet–C robots in isolation room disinfection: Impact of dose, distance, and direct exposure on environmental surface decontamination
- Evaluation of the Hologic Aptima® Vaginitis and Seegene Allplex™ assays for microbiological diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis and Candida vaginitis in women in France, relative to Nugent score and culture.
- Effects of non-thermal disinfection systems on Sclerotinia sclerotiorum decay and quality attributes of spring-harvested Napa cabbage during long-term storage in South Korea
- Plasma pre-treatment and peroxynitric acid soaking as a novel oxidative seed disinfection strategy against seed-borne fungal pathogens in maize
- Comparison between two methods of cleaning and disinfection of digital pulse oximeters in primary care Comparação entre dois métodos de limpeza e desinfecção de oxímetros digitais de pulso na atenção primária Comparación entre dos métodos de limpieza y desinfección de oxímetros de pulso digitales en atención primaria
BibTeX
@article{maeyaert2026disinfection,
title = {{UV‐C LED Disinfection of Flexible Rhinolaryngoscopes: Microbiological, Economic, Environmental, and Legislative Evaluation}},
author = {Camille Maeyaert and Sofie Claeys and Stien Vandendriessche and Hannah Siwe and Bjorn Delbeecke and Pascal Verdonck and Alain F. Kalmar},
journal = {Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1002/lio2.70575},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.70575},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - UV‐C LED Disinfection of Flexible Rhinolaryngoscopes: Microbiological, Economic, Environmental, and Legislative Evaluation
AU - Camille Maeyaert
AU - Sofie Claeys
AU - Stien Vandendriessche
AU - Hannah Siwe
AU - Bjorn Delbeecke
AU - Pascal Verdonck
AU - Alain F. Kalmar
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/28
JO - Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
DO - 10.1002/lio2.70575
UR - https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.70575
AB - Objective To evaluate the microbiological efficacy of the Ray‐Two ultraviolet‐C (UV‐C) light‐emitting diode (LED) chamber for reprocessing flexible rhinolaryngoscopes in otorhinolaryngology (ORL) practice and compare its economic and ecological impacts with chemical high‐level disinfection using the Tristel Trio Wipes System (TTWS). Methods In a prospective study at a tertiary ORL center, bacterial contamination was assessed on 20 flexible rhinolaryngoscopes immediately after routine posterior rhinoscopy and/or laryngoscopy. Paired swab samples were collected from the distal 10–12 cm shaft pre‐ and post‐reprocessing: manual pre‐cleaning with tap water followed by a 4‐min UV‐C LED cycle. Samples were cultured on TSA‐5% sheep blood agar for 36 h at 35°C–37°C, with colony‐forming units (CFUs) enumerated. Per‐cycle costs and carbon footprints were calculated via life cycle assessment (ISO 14040/14044) and compared with TTWS, based on 5000 annual procedures. Results Pre‐reprocessing median CFUs (IQR; range) were 15 (3–27; 2 to > 200), reducing to 0 (0–0; 0–1) post‐UV‐C (p < 0.001; > 99% reduction; 19/20 samples sterile). UV‐C per‐cycle cost was €0.56 (vs. €8.32 for TTWS; 93% savings), with a carbon footprint of 6.81 g CO2e (vs. 115.8 g; 94% reduction). Annual savings: €38,800 and 548 kg CO2e. Conclusion The Ray‐Two UV‐C LED chamber achieves near‐complete bacterial elimination (100% in 19/20 samples; 1 residual CFU in 1/20 samples) on flexible rhinolaryngoscopes, with superior cost‐efficiency and sustainability versus TTWS. This mercury‐free, point‐of‐care method supports greener ORL practice amid evolving EU and US state‐level regulations on mercury‐containing lamps, enhancing infection control without compromising efficacy.
SN - 2378-8038
ER -