Comparing Efficacies of F10 and Virkon S Disinfectants: A Literature Review

This literature review compares the efficacies of F10 and Virkon S disinfectants in laboratory conditions and their suitability in hospitals, animal clinics, and research facilities in Singapore. It also includes a plan to conduct an efficacy trial of F10 SC veterinary disinfectant.

Literature review
BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE
(Literature review)
1

Literature review
Table of Contents
Introduction to the literature review.........................................................................3
Comparing efficacies of different disinfectants used by different
laboratories......................................................................................................................... 3
Suitability of these disinfectants in current laboratory operations of
hospitals, animal clinics and research facilities of Singapore............................5
Plan to conduct an efficacy trial of F10 SC veterinary disinfectant..................7
Conclusion and Gaps in the literature........................................................................8
Bibliography....................................................................................................................... 9
2

Literature review
Introduction to the literature review
The literature review involves a detailed study on the potential of different
disinfectants Virkon S and F10. The study involves comparing the efficiencies of
these disinfectants to work on bacterial, fungal and viral infections in the laboratory
conditions and other settings. Further, suitability of these disinfectants in current
laboratories of hospitals, animal clinics and research facilities in Singapore is studied
to establish their usability in the future. Lastly, a plan to conduct an efficacy trial of
F10SC as a veterinary disinfectant is described in the study.
Comparing efficacies of different disinfectants used by different laboratories
According to1 Hyndman and Marschang studies outbreak of threatening
pathogens have increased an all-over dangerous situation for human survival, man-
made system and it’s working. This made a need for safe and effective measures to
control the negative effects of microorganisms. The most effective strategy is taking
precautionary actions to avoid confrontation with harmful pathogens using measures
like using disinfectants both at the commercial and personal level by humans. Further,
some of the most effective disinfectants that overcome infections in most vulnerable
fields like hospitals, clinics, poultry farms etc., are F10, Virkon S, chlorine, phenolics,
alcohols, and chlorhexidine. Out of these disinfectants, Virkon S and F10 are most
popular once at the commercial level2.
There is a protocol for poultry farm provided by Health and Hygiene
Department of South Africa. This protocol involved different measures to maintain
hygiene in poultry farms. One of these measures is using F10SC with drinking water
in 1:1000 ratios to feed birds ensuring biosecurity from dangerous pathogen Avian
influenza3. In contrast, Virkon S is accepted as a complete disinfectant by various
countries involving Australia, New Zealand and United Nations naming it as “Modern
disinfectant”4. According to another comparative study, F10 holds properties to kill
1 Hyndman, T., & Marschang, R. E. (2017). Infectious Diseases and Immunology. Reptile Medicine
and Surgery in Clinical Practice, 197-216.
2 Naguib, M., & Reid, L. (2016). Amphibians: common conditions seen in practice. Companion
Animal, 21(2), 109-117.
3 Tezel, U., & Pavlostathis, S. G. (2015). Quaternary ammonium disinfectants: microbial adaptation,
degradation and ecology. Current opinion in biotechnology, 33, 296-304.
4 Van Rooij, P., Pasmans, F., Coen, Y., & Martel, A. (2017). Efficacy of chemical disinfectants for the
3

Literature review
gram-negative bacteria in 30 seconds and gram-positive bacteria in 60seconds. F10 is
non-corrosive, non-tainting, aldehyde-free, non-irritating and non-toxic. In contrast,
Virkon S is corrosive powder, viricidal and aquatic application. Vrikon S is effective
on more than 500 strains of virus, fungi and bacteria5.
There is a huge difference in advantages and disadvantages of Virkon S and
F10 SC in terms of their functionality. The disinfectant, Virkon S is confirmed to be
active against 19viral families, 100 fungal strains and 400 bacterial strains. Further,
Virkon S is stable at room temperature and even low temperature workable for 7 days.
However, Virkon is not a cost-effective disinfectant as F10SC, it causes irritation on
skin and eyes and is a corrosive powder. Further, F10 SC is active against fungi,
viruses and bacteria along with sporicidal. It is considered as a very fast working
agent killing viruses in almost 15 seconds. Further, it is non-corrosive and
biodegradable. F10 SC is more cost effective when compared to Virkon S. However,
F10 SC requires proper storage conditions keeping it away from sunlight. F10 SC is
more complex in terms of handling when compared to Virkon, it requires proper
dilution concentration management for effective working67.
The species belonging to the same genera are sometimes controlled by
different disinfectants. In certain study, it is mentioned that F10 along with TriGene is
effective to kill 100% Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis whereas Virkon S is
functional to kill Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans but not F10. Virkon S is
generally preferred disinfectants at poultry farms whereas F10 shows more utilization
in hospitals and clinics. However, in general, the functionality of disinfectant varies
based on factors like location, temperature, usability and other circumstances leading
containment of the salamander chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans. PloS one, 12(10),
e0186269.
5 Cheng, A. C. (2015). Laboratory methods to support epidemiological investigations during
outbreaks. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection, 48(2), S19.
6 Ho, Z. J. M., Vithia, G., Ng, C. G., Maurer-Stroh, S., Tan, C. M., Loh, J., ... & Lee, J. M. V. (2015).
Emergence of norovirus GI. 2 outbreaks in military camps in Singapore. International Journal of
Infectious Diseases, 31, 23-30.
7 Murray, K. A., Skerratt, L. F., Marantelli, G., Berger, L., Hunter, D., Mahony, M., & Hines, H.
(2011). Hygiene protocols for the control of diseases in Australian frogs. Australian Government
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities: Canberra.)
4

Literature review
to the growth of infections89.
Suitability of these disinfectants in current laboratory operations of hospitals,
animal clinics and research facilities of Singapore
F10 veterinary disinfectant comes in different range like F10SC cleanser,
disinfectant, eliminator, aerosol, spray etc. for making it usable for different
requirements in different commercial organisations in Singapore. The low toxicity
and irritation make it preferable for use in veterinary professions like animal
practices, animal clinics, zoo’s and hospitals. F10 SC is considered most suitable
disinfectant for cold sterilisation, instrument sterilisation, high-level disinfection of air
spaces and hard surfaces. This disinfectant is suitable to work on medical equipment
and instruments including endoscopes. Further, it is used as a sanitiser rinse for foods
and fruits as well as an eliminator of air-borne microorganisms1011.
The studies also describe specific use of different F10 SC disinfectant’s
varieties and their specific functionality in veterinary regions like hospitals, clinics
etc. making it most suitable for laboratory operations in these areas. F10 SCXD
cleanser is suitable to clean hard surfaces like laboratory surfaces as well as lightly
soiled areas e.g. cages and kennels of animals in the clinic. The F10 SC can
successfully perform aerosol fogging application to nebulise the respiratory tract from
Aspergillosis infections, nasal flushing and wound irrigation in animal clinics. F10
farm disinfectant eliminates mouth and food disease virus. Further, F10 aerosol
perform high-level air space disinfections in hospital laboratories and F10 wipes are
available to clean and purify equipment’s such as the thermometer, scales,
spectrometer and other laboratory hardware’s. These features make F10 SC most
suitable veterinary disinfectant showing multipurpose activities.
Virkon S is another disinfectant making its benchmark as ‘modern-day
disinfectant’ worldwide has proven to be most workable disinfectant for poultry farm
8 Van Rooij, P., Pasmans, F., Coen, Y., & Martel, A. (2017). Efficacy of chemical disinfectants for the
containment of the salamander chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans. PloS one, 12(10),
e0186269.
9 De Jong, M. S., van Dyk, R., & Weldon, C. (2017). Antifungal efficacy of F10SC veterinary
disinfectant against Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis. Medical mycology, 56(1), 60-68.
10 De Jong, M. S. (2014). Efficacy of F10 against amphibian chytrid fungus (Doctoral dissertation,
North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus).
11 Da Silva, J. A. T., Winarto, B., Dobránszki, J., & Zeng, S. (2015). Disinfection procedures for in
vitro propagation of Anthurium. Folia Horticulturae, 27(1), 3-14.
5

Literature review
management worldwide. Virkon S shows broad-spectrum efficacy by performing
multidirectional suitability in farms as well as laboratories. Virkon provides
biosecurity from laboratory equipment’s to vehicles, water delivery systems to aerial
disinfection as well as use as foot dip. Virkon is suitable for the toughest biosecurity
function that is the reduction of antibiotics in animals to limit antibiotic resistance
development in animals12.
Further apart from field activities, Virkon S is also suitable for laboratory
activities in hospitals, clinics etc. such as F10. Virkon S works as surface and
equipment disinfectant useful for cleaning surfaces, wood, concrete and earth. It
works to clean movable equipment’s and footwear. Virkon S is also famous for its
activity as water system disinfectant providing terminal disinfection and continuous
disinfection. Virkon S using the misting spray, thermal fogging and cold fogging
equipment system also performs the aerial disinfection function13.
Apart from controlling laboratory infection activities, these disinfectants play
a major role in managing certain disease conditions in the hospital and clinical
laboratories. F10 SC is found to play important role in managing major viral hazards
like HIV, IBD, foot and mouth viral infection, rabies and Newcastle disease. Further,
Virkon S helps to manage bacterial infections in humans like food poisoning
(Escherichia and Salmonella) and many poultry infections14. The active ingredients of
F10 are benzalkonium chloride and polyhexamethylene biguanide. The active
ingredients of Vircon S are potassium monopersulphate and alkyl benzene sulphonate.
These features of different usability, effective results, variable and multi-directional
make F10 SC and Virkon S are most workable categories of disinfectant when
compared to other disinfectants used in laboratory conditions15.
12 Hangartner, S., & Laurila, A. (2012). Effects of the disinfectant Virkon S on early life-stages of the
moor frog (Rana arvalis). Amphibia-Reptilia, 33(3-4), 349-353.
13 Gold, K. K., Reed, P. D., Bemis, D. A., Miller, D. L., Gray, M. J., & Souza, M. J. (2013). Efficacy of
common disinfectants and terbinafine in inactivating the growth of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in
culture. Diseases of aquatic organisms, 107(1), 77-81.
14 Tuladhar, E., Hazeleger, W. C., Koopmans, M., Zwietering, M. H., Duizer, E., & Beumer, R. R.
(2015). Reducing viral contamination from finger pads: handwashing is more effective than alcohol-
based hand disinfectants. Journal of Hospital Infection, 90(3), 226-234.
15 Bahemia, I. A., Muganza, A., Moore, R., Sahid, F., & Menezes, C. N. (2015). Microbiology and
antibiotic resistance in severe burns patients: A 5 year review in an adult burns unit. Burns, 41(7),
1536-1542.
6

Literature review
Plan to conduct an efficacy trial of F10 SC veterinary disinfectant
The efficacy trial plan for F10 SC varies for different microorganisms. The
below provided are plan to determine the efficacy of F10 SC
Bactericidal test
The in-vitro culture of bacteria to be tested is prepared in the laboratory
followed by daily application of F10 disinfectants. The concentration and contact time
of disinfectant and bacterial culture is diversified and manipulated to get the most
effective results starting from minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) fro F10 SC.
An F10 SC concentration of 1:3000 is considered effective for most of the bacterial
infections. Further, F10 SC is observed to be effectively functioning at 10 degree
Celsius with observable fall in activity below this temperature. The standard contact
time for the bactericidal test is determined as 5 minutes. As per standard protocols,
inactivation initiation was observed within 30 seconds in gram-positive bacteria and
60 seconds in gram-negative bacteria16.
Fungicidal test
The in vitro culture of fungal species is prepared in the laboratory followed by
daily application of F10 disinfectant followed by diversified concentration and contact
time to get effective results. Fungus in the vegetative state shows elimination within
30 seconds with a concentration of 1:500 F10 SC. The bacterial and fungal spores can
be eliminated with 1:100 concentration of F10SC for 5 minutes or 1:250
concentrations for 15 minutes17.
Virucidal test
The viral infection site at the host is determined to allow daily application of
F10 disinfectant to get a 70% survival rate. The concentration and contact time is
diversified to get effective results. The enveloped virus gets inactive in 10 minutes
with 1:500 concentrations whereas non-envelop virus shall need 20 minutes contact
time with 1:125 concentration of F10 SC as per defined protocol standards18.
16 Hu, H., Johani, K., Gosbell, I. B., Jacombs, A. S. W., Almatroudi, A., Whiteley, G. S., ... & Vickery,
K. (2015). Intensive care unit environmental surfaces are contaminated by multidrug-resistant bacteria
in biofilms: combined results of conventional culture, pyrosequencing, scanning electron microscopy,
and confocal laser microscopy. Journal of Hospital Infection, 91(1), 35-44.
17 Gold, K. K., Reed, P. D., Bemis, D. A., Miller, D. L., Gray, M. J., & Souza, M. J. (2013). Efficacy of
common disinfectants and terbinafine in inactivating the growth of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in
culture. Diseases of aquatic organisms, 107(1), 77-81.
18 Hyndman, T., & Marschang, R. E. (2017). Infectious Diseases and Immunology. Reptile Medicine
and Surgery in Clinical Practice, 197-216.
7

Literature review
Conclusion and Gaps in the literature
Most of the literature supports the use of both these disinfectants is best
suitable manner to control bacterial, fungal as well as viral infections in clinical sites.
However, there is very less information in standard protocols for using these
disinfectants in laboratories. The standard protocols were not easily available to plan
efficacy trial for F10 SC. However, the literature study clearly demonstrates that
selected disinfectants (Virkon S and F10 SC) are suitable enough for their
functionality in hospitals, clinics and laboratories of Singapore. The literature holds
enough information to understand the importance of disinfectants in managing clinical
activities. Virkon S andF10 SC, both are worldwide accepted and successfully
implemented disinfectants.
8

Literature review
Bibliography
Bahemia, I. A., Muganza, A., Moore, R., Sahid, F., & Menezes, C. N. (2015).
Microbiology and antibiotic resistance in severe burns patients: A 5 year review in
an adult burns unit. Burns, 41(7), 1536-1542.
Blakely, W., & Cromie, L. (2015). U.S. Patent No. 8,993,546. Washington, DC: U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office.
Cheng, A. C. (2015). Laboratory methods to support epidemiological investigations
during outbreaks. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection, 48(2), S19.
Choudhury, D., Anene-Nzelu, C., Yu, H., Toh, Y. C., Leo, H. L., & Ng, S. H.
(2015). U.S. Patent Application No. 14/441,831.
Corcoran, M., Morris, D., De Lappe, N., O'connor, J., Lalor, P., Dockery, P., &
Cormican, M. (2014). Commonly used disinfectants fail to eradicate Salmonella
enterica biofilms from food contact surface materials. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol., 80(4), 1507-1514.
Da Silva, J. A. T., Winarto, B., Dobránszki, J., & Zeng, S. (2015). Disinfection
procedures for in vitro propagation of Anthurium. Folia Horticulturae, 27(1), 3-14.
De Jong, M. S. (2014). Efficacy of F10 against amphibian chytrid fungus (Doctoral
dissertation, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus).
De Jong, M. S., van Dyk, R., & Weldon, C. (2017). Antifungal efficacy of F10SC
veterinary disinfectant against Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis. Medical
mycology, 56(1), 60-68.
Gold, K. K., Reed, P. D., Bemis, D. A., Miller, D. L., Gray, M. J., & Souza, M. J.
(2013). Efficacy of common disinfectants and terbinafine in inactivating the
growth of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in culture. Diseases of aquatic
organisms, 107(1), 77-81.
Haberfield, J., Martelli, P., Johnson, R., BARTEN, S., GILLETT, A., LOCK, B., ... &
DUNSTAN, N. (2015). Veterinary care of venomous reptiles (pp. 133-152). New
York, USA: Oxford University Press.
Hangartner, S., & Laurila, A. (2012). Effects of the disinfectant Virkon S on early
life-stages of the moor frog (Rana arvalis). Amphibia-Reptilia, 33(3-4), 349-353.
Hedley, J. (2014). Respiratory disease. In BSAVA Manual of Rabbit Medicine (pp.
160-167). BSAVA Library.
9

Literature review
Ho, Z. J. M., Vithia, G., Ng, C. G., Maurer-Stroh, S., Tan, C. M., Loh, J., ... & Lee, J.
M. V. (2015). Emergence of norovirus GI. 2 outbreaks in military camps in
Singapore. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 31, 23-30.
Hu, H., Johani, K., Gosbell, I. B., Jacombs, A. S. W., Almatroudi, A., Whiteley, G. S.,
... & Vickery, K. (2015). Intensive care unit environmental surfaces are
contaminated by multidrug-resistant bacteria in biofilms: combined results of
conventional culture, pyrosequencing, scanning electron microscopy, and confocal
laser microscopy. Journal of Hospital Infection, 91(1), 35-44.
Hyndman, T., & Marschang, R. E. (2017). Infectious Diseases and
Immunology. Reptile Medicine and Surgery in Clinical Practice, 197-216.
Katzung, B. G., & Trevor, A. J. (Eds.). (2015). Basic & clinical pharmacology (pp.
753-756). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Li, R., Baysal-Gurel, F., Abdo, Z., Miller, S. A., & Ling, K. S. (2015). Evaluation of
disinfectants to prevent mechanical transmission of viruses and a viroid in
greenhouse tomato production. Virology journal, 12(1), 5.
Ling, M. L., How, K. B., Pang, A., Amin, I. A., & Tan, B. K. (2015). The impact of
enhanced strategy on the effectiveness of environmental disinfection at high risk
areas. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection, 48(2), S53.
Martínez-Martínez, S., Yubero-Delgado, S., Rodríguez-Ferri, E. F., Frandoloso, R.,
Álvarez-Estrada, Á., & Gutiérrez-Martín, C. B. (2016). In vitro efficacy of several
disinfectants against Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis and Escherichia coli
strains from poultry. Ciência Rural, 46(8), 1438-1442.
Miller, D. L., Pessier, A. P., Hick, P., & Whittington, R. J. (2015). Comparative
pathology of ranaviruses and diagnostic techniques. In Ranaviruses (pp. 171-208).
Springer, Cham.
Murray, K. A., Skerratt, L. F., Marantelli, G., Berger, L., Hunter, D., Mahony, M., &
Hines, H. (2011). Hygiene protocols for the control of diseases in Australian
frogs. Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water,
Population and Communities: Canberra.)
Naguib, M., & Reid, L. (2016). Amphibians: common conditions seen in
practice. Companion Animal, 21(2), 109-117.
Robinson, R. K. (2014). Encyclopedia of food microbiology. Academic press.
Sanchez-Vizuete, P., Orgaz, B., Aymerich, S., Le Coq, D., & Briandet, R. (2015).
Pathogens protection against the action of disinfectants in multispecies
10

Literature review
biofilms. Frontiers in microbiology, 6, 705.
Sanchez, S. (Ed.). (2015). Antibiotics. Caister Academic Press.
Stanton-Jones, W. K., Parusnath, S., & Alexander, G. J. (2018). The impact of posture
and basking orientation on thermoregulation in the Sungazer (Smaug
giganteus). Journal of Thermal Biology.
Tan, Y. G., Goh, Q. Y., Sim, W. Q., & Tan, K. C. (2014). Evaluation on the
effectiveness of alcohol-based hand sanitizers and antimicrobial soaps in the
removal of microorganisms.
Tezel, U., & Pavlostathis, S. G. (2015). Quaternary ammonium disinfectants:
microbial adaptation, degradation and ecology. Current opinion in
biotechnology, 33, 296-304.
Tuladhar, E., Hazeleger, W. C., Koopmans, M., Zwietering, M. H., Duizer, E., &
Beumer, R. R. (2015). Reducing viral contamination from finger pads:
handwashing is more effective than alcohol-based hand disinfectants. Journal of
Hospital Infection, 90(3), 226-234.
Tun, T., & Wah, L. K. (2016). BSL2 Audit and Certification Program: An Effort to
Harmonize and to Raise Standards in Both Laboratory Infrastructure and Biosafety
Practices in Singapore. Biomedical Science Letters, 22(3), 65-74.
Van Breda, L. K., Dhungyel, O. P., & Ward, M. P. (2017). A comprehensive risk
factor analysis of post-weaning diarrhoea.
Van Rooij, P., Pasmans, F., Coen, Y., & Martel, A. (2017). Efficacy of chemical
disinfectants for the containment of the salamander chytrid fungus
Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans. PloS one, 12(10), e0186269.
Vraneš, J., Lukšić, I., Knežević, J., & Ljubin-Sternak, S. (2015). Health Care
Associated Cutaneous Abscess–A Rare Form of Primary Gonococcal
Infection. American Journal of Medical Case Reports, 3(3), 88-90.
Wang, J., Ried, A., Stapel, H., Zhang, Y., Chen, M., Ang, W. S., ... & Lim, M. H.
(2015). A pilot-scale investigation of ozonation and advanced oxidation processes
at Choa Chu Kang Waterworks. Water Practice and Technology, 10(1), 43-49.
11