07.100.10 - Medical microbiology
ICS 07.100.10 Details
Medical microbiology
Medizinische Mikrobiologie
Microbiologie médicale
Medicinska mikrobiologija
General Information
Frequently Asked Questions
ICS 07.100.10 is a classification code in the International Classification for Standards (ICS) system. It covers "Medical microbiology". The ICS is a hierarchical classification system used to organize international, regional, and national standards, facilitating the search and identification of standards across different fields.
There are 119 standards classified under ICS 07.100.10 (Medical microbiology). These standards are published by international and regional standardization bodies including ISO, IEC, CEN, CENELEC, and ETSI.
The International Classification for Standards (ICS) is a hierarchical classification system maintained by ISO to organize standards and related documents. It uses a three-level structure with field (2 digits), group (3 digits), and sub-group (2 digits) codes. The ICS helps users find standards by subject area and enables statistical analysis of standards development activities.
e-Library Subscription
Create subscription and get permanent access to documents within 07.100.10 - Medical microbiology
Currently subscription includes documents marked with .We are working on making all documents available within the subscription.
This document specifies the minimum requirements for bacteriophage preparation processing including assessment on the titre and quality control. The document applies to data processing of bacteriophage isolation, culture, characterization and storage. This document applies to the quality evaluation/assessment of bacteriophage used for therapy.
- Technical specification18 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document specifies general criteria to be applied in the determination of bacterial endotoxins on or in health care products, components or raw materials using bacterial endotoxins test (BET) methods, using amebocyte lysate reagents. This document is not applicable to the evaluation of pyrogens other than bacterial endotoxins. Other endotoxin detection methodologies are not included (see B.12). This document does not address setting specific endotoxin limit specifications.
- Standard62 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard67 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Single-use systems (SUSs) used for biopharmaceutical manufacturing must maintain sterility and product quality of the fluid inside. Such articles or systems should therefore be validated as providing an effective barrier against microbial ingress. The microbial barrier properties of a SUS may be demonstrated using deterministic physical tests that have been correlated to microbial integrity. Such physical test methods are described in Test Method E3336. Two microbial test methods (aerosol exposure and immersion exposure) are described in this test method that can be used to demonstrate microbial integrity of a SUS or determine the MALL, the maximum defect size that does not allow microbial ingress, into a SUS.
4.2 It is important to note that the results of microbial ingress tests are heavily dependent on the conditions under which the test is performed and are not suitable for routine checking of a SUS due to the test’s destructive nature.
4.2.1 Any size defect may be forced to fail under sufficiently aggressive conditions (including a large enough sample size, high differential pressure, or high hydrostatic pressure, for example) that would not ordinarily reflect normal use conditions. Thus, it is necessary to clearly define the relevant conditions for a test through a risk assessment of both the actual SUS claims and its final use (Practice E3244). Once that is established, the size of defect that can be detected under those conditions can be determined, if required, using defined defects.
4.2.2 “Relevant conditions” refers to worse-case actual use conditions but does not mean that a SUS must be tested under theoretically absolute (extreme) “worst-case” conditions.
4.2.3 Testing may be performed on individual components or entire systems. Considerations for defining “relevant conditions” and testing design should be based on a risk assessment for the SUS intended use and should include:
4.2.3.1 A channel created by a defect or breach through the...
SCOPE
1.1 The microbial test method outlined in this test method applies to microbial ingress risk assessment of a single-use system (SUS) or its individual components that require integrity testing either by the assembly supplier or the end user of the assembly based on a potential risk of a breach to the product or manufacturing process.
1.2 The aim of microbial ingress testing of sterile SUSs used in biopharmaceutical manufacturing is two-fold:
1.2.1 Firstly, it is used to evaluate the ability of a SUS fluid path to remain sterile after a SUS has been challenged by microbial exposure. Microbial exposure is achieved either by directly placing a SUS into a container of microbial challenge solution, or by delivering an aerosolized microbial challenge onto a SUS that is placed inside a test chamber designed to generate and deliver the aerosol. The choice of the test challenge organism should be justified based on a risk assessment of the SUS and conditions of use.
1.2.2 Additionally, microbial ingress testing can be used to determine the maximum allowable leakage limit (MALL) that does not allow microbial ingress under specific test conditions. The defect size that can be detected by specific physical integrity testing methods (see Test Method E3336) can be correlated to this MALL in order to claim microbial integrity. Test articles bearing calibrated defects over a range of dimensions, including up to a defect size expected to consistently allow microbial ingress as a positive control (defect-based positive control), may be tested to determine the MALL.
1.3 Both purposes for microbial ingress testing as described in 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 can either be conducted by liquid immersion or aerosol exposure. For the purpose described in 1.2.2, the type of exposure should be determined according to the SUS’s use-case conditions and a risk assessment.
1.4 The method used to create a breach, hole or defect in single-use film or...
- Standard9 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard9 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assessing the propensity of a nanomaterial to cause cytotoxicity to the cells of a target organ can assist in preclinical development.
5.2 The standard historical cytotoxicity testing of materials and extracts of materials has used fibroblasts and is well documented in Practice F813, Test Method F895, and ISO 10993-5. The use of macrophages and micron size particles has also provided information on cytotoxicity and stimulation using Practice F1903.
5.3 This test method adds to the cytotoxicity test protocols by using target organ cells. Two quantitative assays measuring LDH leakage and MTT reduction are used to estimate cytotoxicity.
5.4 This test method may not be predictive of events occurring in all types of nanomaterial applications, and the user is cautioned to consider the appropriateness of the test for various types of nanomaterial and their applications. This procedure should only be used to compare the cytoxicity of a series of related nanomaterials. Meaningful comparison of unrelated nanomaterials is not possible without additional characterization of physicochemical properties of each individual nanomaterial in the assay matrix.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method provides a methodology to assess the cytotoxicity of suspensions of nanoparticulate materials in porcine proximal tubule cells (LLC-PK1) and human hepatocarcinoma cells (Hep G2), which represent potential target organs following systemic administration.
1.2 This test method is part of an in vitro preclinical characterization cascade.
1.3 This test method consists of a protocol utilizing two methods for estimation of cytotoxicity, 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazolyl-2)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) reduction and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release.
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard7 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Stem cells of hematopoietic origin are pluripotential and may be particularly sensitive to the effects of stimulation by nanoparticulate materials.
5.2 The effect of particles on macrophage responses has an extensive history and can be assessed by Practice F1903. The test method described here will assess the effect on stem cells which can be progenitor cells to the macrophage line.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method provides a protocol for quantitative analysis of the effect of nanoparticulate materials in physiologic solution (isotonic, pH 7.2 ± 0.2) on granulocyte-macrophage colony-forming units (CFU-GM).
1.2 CFU-GM reflects the number of viable bone marrow cells which differentiate into granulocytes and macrophages. A decrease in CFU-GM count is indicative of a test substance’s toxicity to bone marrow and is commonly used for the identification of drug products with myelosuppressive properties, a form of immunosuppression.
1.3 This test method employs murine bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells which proliferate and differentiate to form discrete cell clusters or colonies which are counted.
1.4 This test method is part of the in vitro preclinical characterization cascade for nanoparticulate materials for systemic administration in medical applications.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Amendment13 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
- Amendment13 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 In-vitro osteoblast differentiation assays are one approach to screen progenitor stem cells for their capability to become osteoblasts. The extent of calcium deposits or mineralized matrix that form in vitro may be an indicator of differentiation to a functional osteoblast; however, expression of osteogenic genes or proteins is another important measurement to use in conjunction with this assay to determine the presence of an osteoblast.
5.2 This practice provides a technique for staining, imaging, and quantifying the fluorescence intensity and area related to the mineralization in living cell cultures using the non-toxic calcium-chelating dye, XO. The positively stained area of mineralized deposits in cell cultures is an indirect measure of calcium content. It is important to measure the intensity to ensure that the images have not been underexposed or overexposed. Intensity and area do not correlate directly to calcium content.
5.3 XO enables the monitoring of calcium deposits repeatedly throughout the life of the culture without detriment to the culture. There is no interference on subsequent measurements of the mineralized area due to dye accumulation from repeated application (1).3 Calcium deposits that have been previously stained may appear brighter, but this does not impact the area measurement. Calcein dyes may also be used for this purpose (1) but require a different procedure for analysis than XO (that is, concentration and filter sets) and are thus not included here. Alizarin Red and Von Kossa are not suitable for use with this procedure on living cultures since there is no documentation supporting their repeated use in living cultures without deleterious effects.
5.4 The practice may be applied to cultures of any cells capable of producing calcium deposits. It may also be used to document the absence of mineral in cultures where the goal is to avoid mineralization.
5.5 During osteoblast differentiation assays, osteogenic supplements are ...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice defines a method for the estimation of calcium content at multiple time points in living cell cultures that have been cultured under conditions known to promote mineralization. The practice involves applying a fluorescent calcium-chelating dye that binds to the calcium phosphate mineral crystals present in the live cultures followed by image analysis of fluorescence microscopy images of the stained cell cultures. Quantification of the positively stained areas provides a relative measure of the calcium content in the cell culture plate. A precise correlation between the image analysis parameters and calcium content is beyond the scope of this practice.
1.2 Calcium deposition in a secreted matrix is one of several features that characterize bone formation (in vitro and in vivo), and is therefore a parameter that may indicate bone formation and osteoblast function (that is, osteoblastic differentiation). Calcium deposition may, however, be unrelated to osteoblast differentiation status if extensive cell death occurs in the cell cultures or if high amounts of osteogenic medium components that lead to artifactual calcium-based precipitates are used. Distinguishing between calcium deposition associated with osteoblast-produced mineralized matrix and that from pathological or artifactual deposition requires additional structural and chemical characterization of the mineralized matrix and biological characterization of the cell that is beyond the scope of this practice.
1.3 The parameters obtained by image analysis are expressed in relative fluorescence units or area percentage (area%), for example, fraction of coverage of the area analyzed.
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibili...
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
1.1.1 This document provides guidance for bioburden testing and tests of sterility for biologics and tissue-based products, where this testing is in relation to product sterilization. NOTE This document is intended to be used in conjunction with ISO 11737-1 and ISO 11737-2. 1.1.2 Guidance in this document can be applicable to biologics and tissue-based products that are not sterile but are microbiologically controlled.
- Technical specification13 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Technical specification13 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide should be used by producers and potential producers of non-culture tests to determine the accuracy, selectivity, specificity, and precision of the tests, as defined in Practice E691. Results of such studies should identify the limitations and indicate the utility or applicability of the non-culture test, or both, for use on different types of samples. Guide E1488 recommends other statistical tools for evaluating the suitability and applicability of proposed new test methods.
5.2 Non-culture test users and potential users should employ this guide to evaluate results of the non-culture test as compared to their present methods. Practices D5245 and D5465 should be reviewed in regards to the microbiological methods employed. If culture methods have not been used for monitoring the systems, then guidelines are included for obtaining microbiological expertise.
5.3 Utilization of a non-culture test can reduce the time required to determine the microbiological status of the system and detect microbe that are not detected by culture testing. Consequently, non-culture tests can contribute to the improvement in the overall operating efficiency of microbial contamination condition monitoring and diagnostic efforts, and microbicide performance evaluations.
5.4 Detecting microbial contamination levels that exceed predetermined upper control limits indicates the need for an addition of an antimicrobial agent or other corrective maintenance action. By accurately determining this in a shorter time period than is possible than by culture methods, treatment with antimicrobial agents may circumvent more serious problems than if the treatment were postponed until culture results were available. If the antimicrobial treatment program relied on an inaccurate non-culture test, then unnecessary loss of product and problems associated with inappropriate selection or improper dosing with antimicrobial agents would exist.
5.5 Since many methods based on entirely diff...
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this guide is to assist users and producers of non-culture microbiological tests in determining the applicability of the test for processing different types of samples and evaluating the accuracy of the results. Culture test procedures such as the Heterotrophic (Standard) Plate Count, the Most Probable Number (MPN) method and the Spread Plate Count are widely cited and accepted for the enumeration of microorganisms. However, these methods have their limitations, such as performance time. Moreover, any given culture test method typically recovers only a portion of the total viable microbes present in a sample. It is these limitations that have recently led to the marketing of a variety of non-culture procedures, test kits and instruments.
1.2 Culture test methods estimate microbial population densities based on the ability of mircoorganisms in a sample to proliferate in or on a specified growth medium, under specified growth conditions. Non-culture test methods attempt to provide the same or complimentary information through the measurement of a different parameter. This guide is designed to assist investigators in assessing the accuracy and precision of non-culture methods intended for the determination of microbial population densities or activities.
1.3 It is recognized that the Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) does not recover all microorganisms present in a product or a system (1, 2).2 When this problem occurs during the characterization of a microbiological population, alternative standard enumeration procedures may be necessary, as in the case of sulfate-reducing bacteria. At other times, chemical methods that measure the rates of appearance of metabolic derivatives, the utilization of contaminated product components or genetic profile of the microbial population might be indicated. In evaluating non-culture tests, it is possible that the use of these alternative standard procedures might be...
- Guide6 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide6 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The presence of cell growth medium complicates a direct analysis of cells with SIMS. Attempts to wash out the nutrient medium results in the exposure of cells to unphysiological reagents that may also alter their chemical composition. This obstacle is overcome by using a sandwich freeze-fracture method (1). This cryogenic method has provided a unique way of sampling individual cells in their native state for SIMS analysis.
5.2 The procedure described here has been successfully used for imaging Na+ and K+ ion transport (3), calcium alterations in stimulated cells (4,5), and localization of therapeutic drugs and isotopically labeled molecules in single cells (6). The frozen freeze-dried cells prepared according to this method have been checked for SIMS matrix effects (7). Ion image quantification has also been achieved in this sample type (8).
5.3 The procedure described here is amenable to a wide variety of cell cultures and provides a way for studying the response of individual cells for chemical alterations in the state of health and disease and localization of isotopically-labeled molecules and theraputic drugs in cell culture models.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides the Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS) analyst with a cryogenic method for analyzing individual tissue culture cells growing in vitro. This guide is suitable for frozen-hydrated and frozen-freeze-dried sample types. Included are procedures for correlating optical, laser scanning confocal and secondary electron microscopies to complement SIMS analysis.
1.2 This guide is not suitable for cell cultures that do not attach to the substrate.
1.3 This guide is not suitable for any plastic embedded cell culture specimens.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Guide3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
1.1 This document specifies the general criteria for tests of sterility on medical devices that have been exposed to a treatment with the sterilizing agent which has been reduced relative to that anticipated to be used in routine sterilization processing. These tests are intended to be performed when defining, validating or maintaining a sterilization process.
1.2 This document is not applicable to:
a) sterility testing for routine release of product that has been subjected to a sterilization process,
b) performing a test for sterility (see 3.12),
NOTE 1 The performance of a) or b) is not a requirement of ISO 11135, ISO 11137-1, ISO 11137-2, ISO 14160, ISO 14937, ISO 17665-1 or ISO 20857.
c) test of sterility or test for sterility for demonstration of product shelf life, stability and/or package integrity, and
d) culturing of biological indicators or inoculated products.
NOTE 2 Guidance on culturing biological indicators is included in ISO 11138-7.
- Standard35 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
1.1 This document specifies the general criteria for tests of sterility on medical devices that have been exposed to a treatment with the sterilizing agent which has been reduced relative to that anticipated to be used in routine sterilization processing. These tests are intended to be performed when defining, validating or maintaining a sterilization process.
1.2 This document is not applicable to:
a) sterility testing for routine release of product that has been subjected to a sterilization process,
b) performing a test for sterility (see 3.12),
NOTE 1 The performance of a) or b) is not a requirement of ISO 11135, ISO 11137-1, ISO 11137-2, ISO 14160, ISO 14937, ISO 17665-1 or ISO 20857.
c) test of sterility or test for sterility for demonstration of product shelf life, stability and/or package integrity, and
d) culturing of biological indicators or inoculated products.
NOTE 2 Guidance on culturing biological indicators is included in ISO 11138-7.
- Standard35 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice is useful for assessing cytotoxic potential both when evaluating new materials or formulations for possible use in medical applications, and as part of a quality control program for established medical materials and medical devices.
4.2 This practice assumes that assessment of cytotoxicity potential provides one method for predicting the potential for cytotoxic or necrotic reactions to medical materials and devices during clinical applications to humans. In general, cell culture testing methods have shown good correlation with animal assays when only chemical toxicities are being considered.
Note 1: The results obtained using this method may not predict in vivo behavior which can be influenced by multiple factors such as those arising from site of application or physical properties that may result from design and fabrication.
4.3 This cell culture test method is suitable for adoption in specifications and standards for materials for use in the construction of medical devices that are intended to have direct contact with tissue, tissue fluids, or blood. However, care should be taken when testing materials that are absorbable, include an eluting or degradable coating, are liquid or gelatinous in nature, are irregularly shaped solid materials, or have a high density or mass, to make sure that the method is applicable. If leachables from the test sample are capable of diffusing through the agar layer, agarose-based methods such as Test Method F895 may be considered as an alternate method, depending on sample characteristics, or in cases where investigators wish to further evaluate the cytotoxic response of cells underlying the test sample.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers a reference method of direct contact cell culture testing which may be used in evaluating the cytotoxic potential of materials for use in the construction of medical materials and devices.
1.2 This practice may be used either directly to evaluate materials or as a reference against which other cytotoxicity test methods may be compared.
1.3 This is one of a series of reference test methods for the assessment of cytotoxic potential, employing different techniques.
1.4 Assessment of cytotoxicity is one of several tests employed in determining the biological response to a material, as recommended in Practice F748.
1.5 The L-929 cell line was chosen because it has a significant history of use in assays of this type. This is not intended to imply that its use is preferred; only that the L-929 is a well characterized, readily available, established cell line that has demonstrated reproducible results in several laboratories.
1.6 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
1.1 This document specifies the general criteria for tests of sterility on medical devices that have been exposed to a treatment with the sterilizing agent which has been reduced relative to that anticipated to be used in routine sterilization processing. These tests are intended to be performed when defining, validating or maintaining a sterilization process. 1.2 This document is not applicable to: a) sterility testing for routine release of product that has been subjected to a sterilization process, b) performing a test for sterility (see 3.12), NOTE 1 The performance of a) or b) is not a requirement of ISO 11135, ISO 11137-1, ISO 11137-2, ISO 14160, ISO 14937, ISO 17665-1 or ISO 20857. c) test of sterility or test for sterility for demonstration of product shelf life, stability and/or package integrity, and d) culturing of biological indicators or inoculated products. NOTE 2 Guidance on culturing biological indicators is included in ISO 11138-7.
- Standard16 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard18 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This technique involves a chemical-precipitation reaction between cocaine and the precipitating reagent. The habit and the aggregation of the crystals formed could be used to distinguish cocaine from other drugs (6).
5.2 This technique can be utilized on cocaine present in either the salt or free base form.
5.3 This technique does not distinguish between the salt and free base forms.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes procedures applicable to the analysis of cocaine using multiple microcrystal tests (1-6).2
1.2 These procedures are applicable to cocaine, which is present in solid form or an injectable liquid form. They are not typically applicable to the analysis of cocaine in biological samples.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.4 These procedures could generate observations indicating a positive test for cocaine or its enantiomers which could be incorporated into the analytical scheme as defined by the laboratory.
1.5 This standard cannot replace knowledge, skills, or abilities acquired through appropriate education, training, and experience (see Practice E2326) and is to be used in conjunction with professional judgment by individuals with such discipline-specific knowledge, skills, and abilities.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This technique involves a chemical-precipitation reaction between the phencyclidine or its analogues and the precipitating reagent. The habit and the aggregation of the crystals formed could be used to distinguish phencyclidine or its analogues from other drugs.
5.2 This technique can be utilized on phencyclidine or its analogues present in either the salt or free base form.
5.3 This technique does not distinguish between salt and free base forms.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes procedures applicable to the analysis of phencyclidine and its analogues using microcrystal tests (1-8).2
1.2 These procedures are applicable to phencyclidine and its analogues which are present in solid form or in a liquid form. They are not typically applicable to the analysis of phencyclidine and its analogues in biological samples.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.4 These procedures could generate observations indicating a positive test for phencyclidine and its analogues which could be incorporated into the analytical scheme as defined by the laboratory.
1.5 This standard cannot replace knowledge, skills, or abilities acquired through appropriate education, training, and experience (see Practice E2326) and is to be used in conjunction with sound professional judgment by individuals with such discipline-specific knowledge, skills, and abilities.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The propensity of a material to stimulate delayed contact hypersensitivity must be assessed before clinical application of devices containing this material. Delayed hypersensitivity may occur anywhere in the body. Systemic delayed hypersensitivity may have a complex set of reactions and consequences depending on the actual tissue/organ site of reaction. Although the reactions are seldom life-threatening, severe tissue and organ damage my result over time. Skin is the usual test site to determine the propensity of a material to cause delayed hypersensitivity.
5.2 The standard historical test methods have involved the use of guinea pigs with a cutaneous application and observation of the reaction site. The use of the murine local lymph node assay results in a numerical quantitation of stimulation, rather than subjective evaluation and could be used to determine dose responses.
5.3 This practice may not be predictive of events occurring during all types of implant applications. The user is cautioned to consider the appropriateness of the method in view of the materials being tested, their potential applications, and the recommendations contained in Practice F748.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a methodology to use a combination of in vivio and in situ procedures for the evaluation of delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions.
1.2 This practice is intended to provide an alternative to the use of guinea pigs for evaluation of the ability of a device material to stimulate delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions. This alternative is particularly applicable for materials used in devices that contact only intact skin. However, the guinea pig maximization test is still the recommended method when assessing the delayed hypersensitivity response to metals or when testing substances that do not penetrate the skin but are used in devices that contact deep tissues or breached surfaces. This practice may be used for testing metals, with the exception of nickel-containing metals, unless the unique physicochemical properties of the materials may interfere with the ability of LLNA to detect sensitizing substances.
1.3 This practice consists of a protocol for assessing an increase in lymphocyte proliferation in the lymph nodes draining the site of test article administration on the ears of mice.
1.4 The LLNA has been validated only for low-molecular-weight chemicals that can penetrate the skin. The absorbed chemical or metabolite must bind to macromolecules, such as proteins, to form immunogenic conjugates.
1.5 This practice is one of several developed for the assessment of the biocompatibility of materials. Practice F748 may provide guidance for the selection of appropriate methods for testing materials for a specific application.
1.6 Identification of a supplier of materials or reagents is for the convenience of the user and does not imply a single source. Appropriate materials and reagents may be obtained from many commercial supply houses.
1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.9 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
ISO 11737-1:2018 specifies requirements and provides guidance on the enumeration and microbial characterization of the population of viable microorganisms on or in a health care product, component, raw material or package.
NOTE 1 The nature and extent of microbial characterization is dependent on the intended use of bioburden data.
NOTE 2 See Annex A for guidance on Clauses 1 to 9.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the enumeration or identification of viral, prion or protozoan contaminants. This includes the removal and detection of the causative agents of spongiform encephalopathies, such as scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
NOTE 3 Guidance on inactivating viruses and prions can be found in ISO 22442‑3, ICH Q5A(R1) and ISO 13022.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the microbiological monitoring of the environment in which health care products are manufactured.
- Standard58 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
ISO 11737-1:2018 specifies requirements and provides guidance on the enumeration and microbial characterization of the population of viable microorganisms on or in a health care product, component, raw material or package.
NOTE 1 The nature and extent of microbial characterization is dependent on the intended use of bioburden data.
NOTE 2 See Annex A for guidance on Clauses 1 to 9.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the enumeration or identification of viral, prion or protozoan contaminants. This includes the removal and detection of the causative agents of spongiform encephalopathies, such as scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
NOTE 3 Guidance on inactivating viruses and prions can be found in ISO 22442‑3, ICH Q5A(R1) and ISO 13022.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the microbiological monitoring of the environment in which health care products are manufactured.
- Standard58 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
ISO 11737-1:2018 specifies requirements and provides guidance on the enumeration and microbial characterization of the population of viable microorganisms on or in a health care product, component, raw material or package. NOTE 1 The nature and extent of microbial characterization is dependent on the intended use of bioburden data. NOTE 2 See Annex A for guidance on Clauses 1 to 9. ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the enumeration or identification of viral, prion or protozoan contaminants. This includes the removal and detection of the causative agents of spongiform encephalopathies, such as scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. NOTE 3 Guidance on inactivating viruses and prions can be found in ISO 22442‑3, ICH Q5A(R1) and ISO 13022. ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the microbiological monitoring of the environment in which health care products are manufactured.
- Standard48 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard54 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This test method is useful for assessing the cytotoxic potential of new materials and formulations and as part of a quality control program for established medical devices and components.
4.2 This test method assumes that assessment of cytotoxicity provides useful information to aid in predicting the potential clinical applications in humans. Cell culture methods have shown good correlation with animal assays and are frequently more sensitive to cytotoxic agents.
4.3 This cell culture test method is suitable for incorporation into specifications and standards for materials to be used in the construction of medical devices that are to be implanted into the human body or placed in contact with tissue fluids or blood on a long-term basis.
4.4 Some biomaterials with a history of safe clinical use in medical devices are cytotoxic. This test method does not imply that all biomaterials must pass this assay to be considered safe for clinical use (Practice F748).
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is appropriate for materials in a variety of shapes and for materials that are not necessarily sterile. This test method would be appropriate in situations in which the amount of material is limited. For example, small devices or powders could be placed on the agar and the presence of a zone of inhibition of cell growth could be examined.
1.1.1 This test method is not appropriate for leachables that do not diffuse through agar or agarose.
1.1.2 While the agar layer can act as a cushion to protect the cells from the specimen, there may be materials that are sufficiently heavy to compress the agar and prevent diffusion or to cause mechanical damage to the cells. This test method would not be appropriate for these materials.
1.2 The L-929 cell line was chosen because it has a significant history of use in assays of this type. This is not intended to imply that its use is preferred, only that the L-929 is an established cell line, well characterized and readily available, that has demonstrated reproducible results in several laboratories.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This classification was developed to permit the addition of descriptive symbols and values for further new formulations with improved properties without complete reorganization of the standard and to facilitate the incorporation of future new test methods to keep pace with changing industry requirements.
SCOPE
1.1 This classification provides guidance to engineers and users in the selection of practical vinyl chloride plastics for medical applications and further provides a method for specifying these materials by use of a simple line call-out designation. This classification excludes vinyl chloride plastics used in long-term implants.
1.2 Use is made of a classification scheme based on the premise that the composition of vinyl chloride plastics, copolymers, fillers, plasticizers, stabilizers, and other additives in these systems can be arranged into characteristic material designations.
1.3 In all cases where the provisions of this classification system would conflict with those of the detailed specification for a particular device, the latter shall take precedence.
Note 1: For cases in which the vinyl chloride plastic may be used for purposes where the requirements are too specific to be completely described by this classification system, it is advisable for the purchaser to consult the supplier to secure adjustment of the properties to suit the actual conditions to which the device is to be subjected.
1.4 The biocompatibility of vinyl chloride plastics as a class of materials has not been established. Since many compositions and formulations fall under this class, it is essential that the fabricators/device manufacturers assure the safety and efficacy of the specific composition or formulation, in its intended application, using state-of-the-art test methods.
1.5 This classification is to assist the interface between the material supplier and the device manufacturer (fabricator) who purchases a formulated vinyl chloride plastic for a component. For those device manufacturers (fabricators) who do their own formulating, compounding, extrusion, molding, and so forth, this classification does not apply.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
Amandma A1:2010 je dodatek k standardu SIST EN ISO 14729:2002
This International Standard specifies two test methods for evaluating the antimicrobial activity of products to be marketed for contact lens disinfection by chemical means and for products that are part of a contact lens care regimen. This International Standard is not applicable to the hygienic management of trial lenses.
- Amendment10 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
Migrated from Progress Sheet (TC Comment) (2000-07-10): UAP of 4 months (TC Res 5/1999) (CC/990525)
- Amendment3 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
Migrated from Progress Sheet (TC Comment) (2000-07-10): UAP of 4 months (TC Res 5/1999) (CC/990525)
2020-01-20: Originator of XML version: NEN (on behalf of NEN, ASI, DS, SFS, SIS, SN)
- Amendment3 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This European Standard provides terms for different classifications of culture media used in microbiology (bacteriology and mycology).
- Standard4 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This European Standard specifies requirements for the performance of culture media. It is concerned with the traceability, comparability, reproducibility and suitability of culture media used in microbiological laboratories. These characteristics are achieved by applying the quality criteria outlined in this standard. This European Standard is applicable to : a) commercial organizations distributing media to microbiology laboratories in ready-to-use form, as dehydrated media or as semi-finished media (see 2.5 in EN 1659 : 1996) ; b) non commercial organizations that distribute media to satellite locations ; c) laboratories that prepare culture media for their own use. Cell culture media are not covered by this standard.
- Standard13 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This European Standard specifies requirements for the performance of culture media. It is concerned with the traceability, comparability, reproducibility and suitability of culture media used in microbiological laboratories. These characteristics are achieved by applying the quality criteria outlined in this standard. This European Standard is applicable to : a) commercial organizations distributing media to microbiology laboratories in ready-to-use form, as dehydrated media or as semi-finished media (see 2.5 in EN 1659 : 1996) ; b) non commercial organizations that distribute media to satellite locations ; c) laboratories that prepare culture media for their own use. Cell culture media are not covered by this standard.
- Standard13 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This European Standard provides terms for different classifications of culture media used in microbiology (bacteriology and mycology).
- Standard4 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
ISO 11737-1:2018 specifies requirements and provides guidance on the enumeration and microbial characterization of the population of viable microorganisms on or in a health care product, component, raw material or package.
NOTE 1 The nature and extent of microbial characterization is dependent on the intended use of bioburden data.
NOTE 2 See Annex A for guidance on Clauses 1 to 9.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the enumeration or identification of viral, prion or protozoan contaminants. This includes the removal and detection of the causative agents of spongiform encephalopathies, such as scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
NOTE 3 Guidance on inactivating viruses and prions can be found in ISO 22442‑3, ICH Q5A(R1) and ISO 13022.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the microbiological monitoring of the environment in which health care products are manufactured.
- Draft72 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This document specifies general criteria to be applied in the determination of
bacterial endotoxins on or in health care products, components or raw materials
using bacterial endotoxins test (BET) methods, using amebocyte lysate reagents.
This document is not applicable to the evaluation of pyrogens other than
bacterial endotoxins. Other endotoxin detection methodologies are not included.
This document does not address setting specific endotoxin limit specifications.
- Draft68 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
ISO 11737-1:2018 specifies requirements and provides guidance on the enumeration and microbial characterization of the population of viable microorganisms on or in a health care product, component, raw material or package.
NOTE 1 The nature and extent of microbial characterization is dependent on the intended use of bioburden data.
NOTE 2 See Annex A for guidance on Clauses 1 to 9.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the enumeration or identification of viral, prion or protozoan contaminants. This includes the removal and detection of the causative agents of spongiform encephalopathies, such as scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
NOTE 3 Guidance on inactivating viruses and prions can be found in ISO 22442‑3, ICH Q5A(R1) and ISO 13022.
ISO 11737-1:2018 does not apply to the microbiological monitoring of the environment in which health care products are manufactured.
- Draft72 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This document specifies general criteria to be applied in the determination of
bacterial endotoxins on or in health care products, components or raw materials
using bacterial endotoxins test (BET) methods, using amebocyte lysate reagents.
This document is not applicable to the evaluation of pyrogens other than
bacterial endotoxins. Other endotoxin detection methodologies are not included.
This document does not address setting specific endotoxin limit specifications.
- Draft68 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Single-use systems (SUSs) used for biopharmaceutical manufacturing must maintain sterility and product quality of the fluid inside. Such articles or systems should therefore be validated as providing an effective barrier against microbial ingress. The microbial barrier properties of a SUS may be demonstrated using deterministic physical tests that have been correlated to microbial integrity. Two test methods (aerosol exposure and immersion exposure) are described that can be used to demonstrate microbial integrity of a SUS or determine the MALL, the maximum defect size that does not allow microbial ingress, into a SUS.
4.2 It is important to note that the results of microbial ingress tests are heavily dependent on the conditions under which the test is performed and are not suitable for routine checking of a SUS due to the test’s destructive nature.
4.2.1 Any size defect may be forced to fail under sufficiently aggressive conditions (including a large enough sample size, high differential pressure, or high hydrostatic pressure, for example) that would not ordinarily reflect normal use conditions. Thus, it is necessary to clearly define the relevant conditions for a test through a risk assessment of both the actual SUS claims and its final use (Practice E3244). Once that is established, the size of defect that can be detected under those conditions can be determined, if required, using defined defects.
4.2.2 “Relevant conditions” refers to worse-case actual use conditions but does not mean that a SUS must be tested under theoretically absolute (extreme) “worst-case” conditions.
4.2.3 Testing may be performed on individual components or entire systems. Considerations for defining “relevant conditions” and testing design should be based on a risk assessment for the SUS intended use and should include:
4.2.3.1 A channel created by a defect or breach through the film thickness or through a seam or connection which must be filled with liquid to allow mic...
SCOPE
1.1 The microbial test method outlined in this document applies to microbial ingress risk assessment of a single-use system (SUS) or its individual components that require integrity testing either by the assembly supplier or the end user of the assembly based on a potential risk of a breach to the product or manufacturing process.
1.2 The aim of microbial ingress testing of sterile SUSs used in biopharmaceutical manufacturing is two-fold:
1.2.1 Firstly, it is used to evaluate the ability of a SUS fluid path to remain sterile after a SUS has been challenged by microbial exposure. Microbial exposure is achieved either by directly placing a SUS into a container of microbial challenge solution, or by delivering an aerosolized microbial challenge onto a SUS that is placed inside a test chamber designed to generate and deliver the aerosol. The choice of the test challenge organism should be justified based on a risk assessment of the SUS and conditions of use.
1.2.2 Additionally, microbial ingress testing can be used to determine the maximum allowable leakage limit (MALL) that does not allow microbial ingress under specific test conditions. The defect size that can be detected by specific physical integrity testing methods can be correlated to this MALL in order to claim microbial integrity. Test articles bearing calibrated defects over a range of dimensions, including up to a defect size expected to consistently allow microbial ingress as a positive control (defect-based positive control), may be tested to determine the MALL.
1.3 Both purposes for microbial ingress testing as described in 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 can either be conducted by liquid immersion or aerosol exposure. For the purpose described in 1.2.2, the type of exposure should be determined according to the SUS’s use-case conditions and a risk assessment.
1.4 The method used to create a breach, hole or defect in single-use film or in a SUS test article, as ...
- Standard8 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide should be used by producers and potential producers of non-culture tests to determine the accuracy, selectivity, specificity, and precision of the tests, as defined in Practice E691. Results of such studies should identify the limitations and indicate the utility or applicability of the non-culture test, or both, for use on different types of samples.
5.2 Non-culture test users and potential users should employ this guide to evaluate results of the non-culture test as compared to their present methods. Practices D5245 and D5465 should be reviewed in regards to the microbiological methods employed. If culture methods have not been used for monitoring the systems, then guidelines are included for obtaining microbiological expertise.
5.3 Utilization of a non-culture test can reduce the time required to determine the microbiological status of the system and detect microbe that are not detected by culture testing. Consequently, non-culture tests can contribute to the improvement in the overall operating efficiency of microbial contamination condition monitoring and diagnostic efforts, and microbicide performance evaluations.
5.4 Detecting microbial contamination levels that exceed predetermined upper control limits indicates the need for an addition of an antimicrobial agent or other corrective maintenance action. By accurately determining this in a shorter time period than is possible than by culture methods, treatment with antimicrobial agents may circumvent more serious problems than if the treatment were postponed until culture results were available. If the antimicrobial treatment program relied on an inaccurate non-culture test, then unnecessary loss of product and problems associated with inappropriate selection or improper dosing with antimicrobial agents would exist.
5.5 Since many methods based on entirely different chemical and microbiological principles are considered, it is not possible to establish a unique design and recommend a ...
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this guide is to assist users and producers of non-culture microbiological tests in determining the applicability of the test for processing different types of samples and evaluating the accuracy of the results. Culture test procedures such as the Heterotrophic (Standard) Plate Count, the Most Probable Number (MPN) method and the Spread Plate Count are widely cited and accepted for the enumeration of microorganisms. However, these methods have their limitations, such as performance time. Moreover, any given culture test method typically recovers only a portion of the total viable microbes present in a sample. It is these limitations that have recently led to the marketing of a variety of non-culture procedures, test kits and instruments.
1.2 Culture test methods estimate microbial population densities based on the ability of mircoorganisms in a sample to proliferate in or on a specified growth medium, under specified growth conditions. Non-culture test methods attempt to provide the same or complimentary information through the measurement of a different parameter. This guide is designed to assist investigators in assessing the accuracy and precision of non-culture methods intended for the determination of microbial population densities or activities.
1.3 It is recognized that the Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) does not recover all microorganisms present in a product or a system (1, 2).2 When this problem occurs during the characterization of a microbiological population, alternative standard enumeration procedures may be necessary, as in the case of sulfate-reducing bacteria. At other times, chemical methods that measure the rates of appearance of metabolic derivatives, the utilization of contaminated product components or genetic profile of the microbial population might be indicated. In evaluating non-culture tests, it is possible that the use of these alternative standard procedures might be...
- Guide5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide should be used by producers and potential producers of non-culture tests to determine the accuracy, selectivity, specificity, and reproducibility of the tests, as defined in Practice E691. Results of such studies should identify the limitations and indicate the utility or applicability of the non-culture test, or both, for use on different types of samples.
5.2 Non-culture test users and potential users should employ this guide to evaluate results of the non-culture test as compared to their present methods. Practices D5245 and D5465 should be reviewed in regards to the microbiological methods employed. If culture methods have not been used for monitoring the systems, then guidelines are included for obtaining microbiological expertise.
5.3 Utilization of a non-culture test can reduce the time required to determine the microbiological status of the system and detect microbe that are not detected by culture testing. Consequently, non-culture tests can contribute to the improvement in the overall operating efficiency of microbial contamination condition monitoring and diagnostic efforts, and microbicide performance evaluations.
5.4 Detecting microbial contamination levels that exceed predetermined upper control limits indicates the need for an addition of an antimicrobial agent or other corrective maintenance action. By accurately determining this in a shorter time period than is possible than by culture methods, treatment with antimicrobial agents may circumvent more serious problems than if the treatment were postponed until culture results were available. If the antimicrobial treatment program relied on an inaccurate non-culture test, then unnecessary loss of product and problems associated with inappropriate selection or improper dosing with antimicrobial agents would exist.
5.5 Since many methods based on entirely different chemical and microbiological principles are considered, it is not possible to establish a unique design and recomm...
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this guide is to assist users and producers of non-culture tests in determining the applicability of the test for processing different types of samples and evaluating the accuracy of the results. Culture test procedures such as the Heterotrophic (Standard) Plate Count, the Most Probable Number (MPN) method and the Spread Plate Count are widely cited and accepted for the enumeration of microorganisms. However, these methods have their limitations, such as performance time and degree of accuracy. Moreover any given culture test method typically recovers only a fraction of the total viable microbes present in a sample. It is these limitations that have recently led to the marketing of a variety of non-culture procedures, test kits and instruments.
1.2 Culture test methods estimate microbial population densities based on the ability of mircoorganisms in a sample to proliferate in or on a specified growth medium, under specified growth conditions. Non-culture test methods attempt to provide the same or complimentary information through the measurement of a different parameter. This guide is designed to assist investigators in assessing the accuracy and precision of non-culture methods intended for the determination of microbial population densities or activities.
1.3 It is recognized that the Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) does not recover all microorganisms present in a product or a system (1, 2).2 When this problem occurs during the characterization of a microbiological population, alternative standard enumeration procedures may be necessary, as in the case of sulfate-reducing bacteria. At other times, chemical methods that measure the rates of appearance of metabolic derivatives, the utilization of contaminated product components or genetic profile of the microbial population might be indicated. In evaluating non-culture tests, it is possible that the use of these alternative standard procedures m...
- Guide5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 In-vitro osteoblast differentiation assays are one approach to screen progenitor stem cells for their capability to become osteoblasts. The extent of calcified deposits or mineralized matrix that form in-vitro may be an indicator of differentiation to a functional osteoblast; however, gene expression of osteogenic genes or proteins is another important measurement to use in conjunction with this assay to determine the presence of an osteoblast.
5.2 This test method provides a technique for staining, imaging, and quantifying the fluorescence intensity and area related to the mineralization in living cell cultures using the non-toxic calcium-chelating dye, xylenol orange. The positively stained area of mineralized deposits in cell cultures is an indirect measure of calcium content. It is important to measure the intensity to assure that the images have not been underexposed or overexposed. Intensity does not correlate directly to calcium content as well as area.
5.3 Xylenol orange enables the monitoring of calcified deposits repeatedly throughout the life of the culture without detriment to the culture. There is no interference on subsequent measurements of mineralized area due to dye accumulation from repeated application (1).3 Calcified deposits that have been previously stained may appear brighter, but this does not impact the area measurement. Calcein dyes may also be used for this purpose (1) but require a different procedure for analysis than xylenol orange (i.e., concentration and filter sets) and are thus not included here. Alizarin Red and Von Kossa are not suitable for use with this procedure on living cultures since there is no documentation supporting their repeated use in living cultures without deleterious effects.
5.4 The test method may be applied to cultures of any cells capable of producing calcified deposits. It may also be used to document the absence of mineral in cultures where the goal is to avoid mineralization.
5.5 During osteo...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice defines a method for the estimation of calcium content at multiple time points in living cell cultures that have been cultured under conditions known to promote mineralization. The practice involves applying a fluorescent calcium chelating dye that binds to the calcium phosphate mineral crystals present in the live cultures followed by image analysis of fluorescence microscopy images of the stained cell cultures. Quantification of the positively stained areas provides a relative measure of the calcium content in the cell culture plate. A precise correlation between the image analysis parameters and calcium content is beyond the scope of this practice.
1.2 Calcium deposition in a secreted matrix is one of several features that characterize bone formation (in vitro and in vivo), and is therefore a parameter that may indicate bone formation and osteoblast function (i.e., osteoblastic differentiation). Calcium deposition may, however, be unrelated to osteoblast differentiation status if extensive cell death occurs in the cell cultures or if high amounts of osteogenic medium components that lead to artifactual calcium-based precipitates are used. Distinguishing between calcium deposition associated with osteoblast-produced mineralized matrix and that from pathological or artifactual deposition requires additional structural and chemical characterization of the mineralized matrix and biological characterization of the cell that is beyond the scope of this practice.
1.3 The parameters obtained by image analysis are expressed in relative fluorescence units or area percentage, e.g., fraction of coverage of the area analyzed.
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of ...
- Standard15 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide should be used by producers and potential producers of nonconventional tests to determine the accuracy, selectivity, specificity, and reproducibility of the tests, as defined in Practices E691 and D3870. Results of such studies should identify the limitations and indicate the utility or applicability of the nonconventional test, or both, for use on different types of samples.
5.2 Nonconventional test users and potential users should employ this guide to evaluate results of the nonconventional test as compared to their present methods. Practices D5245 and D5465 should be reviewed in regards to the conventional microbiological methods employed. If conventional methods have not been used for monitoring the systems, then guidelines are included for obtaining microbiological expertise.
5.3 Utilization of a nonconventional test may reduce the time required to determine the microbiological status of the system and enable an improvement in the overall operating efficiency. In many cases, the findings of a significantly high level of bacteria indicates the need for an addition of an antimicrobial agent. By accurately determining this in a shorter time period than by conventional methods, treatment with antimicrobial agents may circumvent more serious problems than if the treatment were postponed until conventional results were available. If the antimicrobial treatment program relies on an inaccurate nonconventional test, then unnecessary loss of product and problems associated with inappropriate selection or improper dosing with antimicrobial agents would exist.
5.4 Since many methods based on entirely different chemical and microbiological principles are considered, it is not possible to establish a unique design and recommend a specific method of statistical analyses for the comparisons to be made. It is only possible to present guides that should be followed while performing the experiments. It is also recommended that a statistician be involved...
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this guide is to assist users and producers of nonconventional tests in determining the applicability of the test for processing different types of samples and evaluating the accuracy of the results. Conventional procedures such as the Heterotrophic (Standard) Plate Count, the Most Probable Number (MPN) method and the Spread Plate Count are widely cited and accepted for the enumeration of microorganisms. However, these methods have their limitations, such as performance time and degree of accuracy. It is these limitations that have recently led to the marketing of a variety of non-conventional procedures, test kits and instruments.
1.2 A conventional test is one that is widely accepted and published as a standard microbiological method or related procedure. A new, nonconventional test method will attempt to provide the same information through the measurement of a different parameter. This guide is designed to assist investigators in assessing the accuracy and precision of nonconventional methods intended for the determination of microbial population densities or activities.
1.3 It is recognized that the Heterotrophic Plate Count does not recover all microorganisms present in a product or a system (1, 2).2 When this problem occurs during the characterization of a microbiological population, alternative standard enumeration procedures may be necessary, as in the case of sulfate-reducing bacteria. At other times, chemical methods that measure the rates of appearance of metabolic derivatives or the utilization of contaminated product components might be indicated. In evaluating nonconventional tests, the use of these alternative standard procedures may be the only means available for establishing correlation. In such cases, this guide can serve as a reference for those considerations.
1.4 Since there are so many types of tests that could be considered nonconventional, it is impossible to recom...
- Guide4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Stem cells of hematopoietic origin are pluripotential and may be particularly sensitive to the effects of stimulation by nanoparticulate materials.
5.2 The effect of particles on macrophage responses has an extensive history and can be assessed by Practice F1903. The test method described here will assess the effect on stem cells which can be progenitor cells to the macrophage line.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method provides a protocol for quantitative analysis of the effect of nanoparticulate materials in physiologic solution on granulocyte-macrophage colony-forming units.
1.2 This test method employs murine bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells which proliferate and differentiate to form discrete cell clusters or colonies which are counted.
1.3 This test method is part of the in vitro preclinical characterization cascade for nanoparticulate materials for systemic administration in medical applications.
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assessing the propensity of a nanomaterial to cause cytotoxicity to the cells of a target organ can assist in preclinical development.
5.2 The standard historical cytotoxicity testing of materials and extracts of materials has used fibroblasts and is well documented in Practice F813, Test Method F895, and ISO 10993-5. The use of macrophages and micron size particles has also provided information on cytotoxicity and stimulation using Practice F1903.
5.3 This test method adds to the cytotoxicity test protocols by using target organ cells. Two quantitative assays measuring LDH leakage and MTT reduction are used to estimate cytotoxicity.
5.4 This test method may not be predictive of events occurring in all types of nanomaterial applications and the user is cautioned to consider the appropriateness of the test for various types of nanomaterial applications. This procedure should only be used to compare the cytoxicity of a series of related nanomaterials. Meaningful comparison of unrelated nanomaterials is not possible without additional characterization of physicochemical properties of each individual nanomaterial in the assay matrix.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method provides a methodology to assess the cytotoxicity of suspensions of nanoparticulate materials in porcine proximal tubule cells (LLC-PK1) and human hepatocarcinoma cells (Hep G2) which represents potential target organs following systemic administration
1.2 This test method is part of the in vitro preclinical characterization cascade.
1.3 This test method consists of a protocol utilizing two methods for estimation of cytotoxicity, 3-(4,5-Dimethylthiazolyl-2)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) reduction and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release.
1.4 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard6 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The propensity of a material to stimulate delayed contact hypersensitivity must be assessed before clinical application of devices containing this material. Delayed hypersensitivity may occur anywhere in the body. Systemic delayed hypersensitivity may have a complex set of reactions and consequences depending on the actual tissue/organ site of reaction. Although the reactions are seldom life-threatening, severe tissue and organ damage my result over time. Skin is the usual test site to determine the propensity of a material to cause delayed hypersensitivity.
5.2 The standard historical test methods have involved the use of guinea pigs with a cutaneous application and observation of the reaction site. The use of the murine local lymph node assay results in a numerical quantitation of stimulation, rather than subjective evaluation and could be used to determine dose responses.
5.3 This practice may not be predictive of events occurring during all types of implant applications. The user is cautioned to consider the appropriateness of the method in view of the materials being tested, their potential applications, and the recommendations contained in Practice F748.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a methodology to use an in-situ procedure for the evaluation of delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions.
1.2 This practice is intended to provide an alternative to the use of guinea pigs for evaluation of the ability of a device material to stimulate delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions. This alternative is particularly applicable for materials used in devices that contact only intact skin. However, the guinea pig maximization test is still the recommended method when assessing the delayed hypersensitivity response to metals or when testing substances that do not penetrate the skin but are used in devices that contact deep tissues or breached surfaces. This practice may be used for testing metals, with the exception of nickel-containing metals, unless the unique physicochemical properties of the materials may interfere with the ability of LLNA to detect sensitizing substances.
1.3 This practice consists of a protocol for assessing an increase in lymphocyte proliferation within the nodes draining the site of administration on the ears of mice.
1.4 The LLNA has been validated only for low-molecular-weight chemicals that can penetrate the skin. The absorbed chemical or metabolite must bind to macromolecules, such as proteins, to form immunogenic conjugates.
1.5 This practice is one of several developed for the assessment of the biocompatibility of materials. Practice F748 may provide guidance for the selection of appropriate methods for testing materials for a specific application.
1.6 Identification of a supplier of materials or reagents is for the convenience of the user and does not imply a single source. Appropriate materials and reagents may be obtained from many commercial supply houses.
1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The presence of cell growth medium complicates a direct analysis of cells with SIMS. Attempts to wash out the nutrient medium results in the exposure of cells to unphysiological reagents that may also alter their chemical composition. This obstacle is overcome by using a sandwich freeze-fracture method (1). This cryogenic method has provided a unique way of sampling individual cells in their native state for SIMS analysis.
5.2 The procedure described here has been successfully used for imaging Na+ and K+ ion transport (3), calcium alterations in stimulated cells (4,5), and localization of therapeutic drugs and isotopically labeled molecules in single cells (6). The frozen freeze-dried cells prepared according to this method have been checked for SIMS matrix effects (7). Ion image quantification has also been achieved in this sample type (8).
5.3 The procedure described here is amenable to a wide variety of cell cultures and provides a way for studying the response of individual cells for chemical alterations in the state of health and disease and localization of isotopically-labeled molecules and theraputic drugs in cell culture models.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides the Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (SIMS) analyst with a cryogenic method for analyzing individual tissue culture cells growing in vitro. This guide is suitable for frozen-hydrated and frozen-freeze-dried sample types. Included are procedures for correlating optical, laser scanning confocal and secondary electron microscopies to complement SIMS analysis.
1.2 This guide is not suitable for cell cultures that do not attach to the substrate.
1.3 This guide is not suitable for any plastic embedded cell culture specimens.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Guide3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The propensity of a material to stimulate delayed contact hypersensitivity must be assessed before clinical application of devices containing this material. Delayed hypersensitivity may occur anywhere in the body. Systemic delayed hypersensitivity may have a complex set of reactions and consequences depending on the actual tissue/organ site of reaction. Although the reactions are seldom life-threatening, severe tissue and organ damage my result over time. Skin is the usual test site to determine the propensity of a material to cause delayed hypersensitivity.
5.2 The standard historical test methods have involved the use of guinea pigs with a cutaneous application and observation of the reaction site. The use of the murine local lymph node assay results in a numerical quantitation of stimulation, rather than subjective evaluation and could be used to determine dose responses.
5.3 This practice may not be predictive of events occurring during all types of implant applications. The user is cautioned to consider the appropriateness of the method in view of the materials being tested, their potential applications, and the recommendations contained in Practice F748.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a methodology to use an in-situ procedure for the evaluation of delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions.
1.2 This practice is intended to provide an alternative to the use of guinea pigs for evaluation of the ability of a device material to stimulate delayed contact hypersensitivity reactions. This alternative is particularly applicable for materials used in devices that contact only intact skin. However, the guinea pig maximization test is still the recommended method when assessing the delayed hypersensitivity response to metals or when testing substances that do not penetrate the skin but are used in devices that contact deep tissues or breached surfaces. The guinea pig maximization test should be used for these substances.
1.3 This practice consists of a protocol for assessing an increase in lymphocyte proliferation within the nodes draining the site of administration on the ears of mice.
1.4 The LLNA has been validated only for low-molecular-weight chemicals that can penetrate the skin. The absorbed chemical or metabolite must bind to macromolecules, such as proteins, to form immunogenic conjugates.
1.5 This practice is one of several developed for the assessment of the biocompatibility of materials. Practice F748 may provide guidance for the selection of appropriate methods for testing materials for a specific application.
1.6 Identification of a supplier of materials or reagents is for the convenience of the user and does not imply a single source. Appropriate materials and reagents may be obtained from many commercial supply houses.
1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice is useful for assessing cytotoxic potential both when evaluating new materials or formulations for possible use in medical applications, and as part of a quality control program for established medical materials and medical devices.
4.2 This practice assumes that assessment of cytotoxicity potential provides one method for predicting the potential for cytotoxic or necrotic reactions to medical materials and devices during clinical applications to humans. In general, cell culture testing methods have shown good correlation with animal assays and are frequently more sensitive to toxic moieties.
4.3 This cell culture test method is suitable for adoption in specifications and standards for materials for use in the construction of medical devices that are intended to be implanted in the human body or placed in contact with tissue, tissue fluids, or blood on a long-term basis. However, care should be taken when testing materials that are resorbable to be sure the method is applicable.
4.4 Since cells in this direct contact test method are not protected by an overlying agarose layer, they are more susceptible to potential mechanical damage imparted by the overlying test sample. Investigators wishing to evaluate the cytotoxic response of cells underlying the test sample should consider agarose-based methods similar to Test Method F895. Alternatively, depending on sample characteristics, extraction methods such as Practice F619 may also be considered.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers a reference method of direct contact cell culture testing which may be used in evaluating the cytotoxic potential of materials for use in the construction of medical materials and devices.
1.2 This practice may be used either directly to evaluate materials or as a reference against which other cytotoxicity test methods may be compared.
1.3 This is one of a series of reference test methods for the assessment of cytotoxic potential, employing different techniques.
1.4 Assessment of cytotoxicity is one of several tests employed in determining the biological response to a material, as recommended in Practice F748.
1.5 The L-929 cell line was chosen because it has a significant history of use in assays of this type. This is not intended to imply that its use is preferred; only that the L-929 is a well-characterized, readily available, established cell line that has demonstrated reproducible results in several laboratories.
1.6 Since the test sample is not removed at the time of microscopic evaluation and underlying cells may be affected by the specific gravity of the test sample, this practice is limited to evaluation of cells outside the perimeter of the overlying test sample.
1.7 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This test method is useful for assessing the cytotoxic potential of new materials and formulations and as part of a quality control program for established medical devices and components.
This test method assumes that assessment of cytotoxicity provides useful information to aid in predicting the potential clinical applications in humans. Cell culture methods have shown good correlation with animal assays and are frequently more sensitive to cytotoxic agents.
This cell culture test method is suitable for incorporation into specifications and standards for materials to be used in the construction of medical devices that are to be implanted into the human body or placed in contact with tissue fluids or blood on a long-term basis.
Some biomaterials with a history of safe clinical use in medical devices are cytotoxic. This test method does not imply that all biomaterials must pass this assay to be considered safe for clinical use (Practice F748).
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is appropriate for materials in a variety of shapes and for materials that are not necessarily sterile. This test method would be appropriate in situations in which the amount of material is limited. For example, small devices or powders could be placed on the agar and the presence of a zone of inhibition of cell growth could be examined.
1.1.1 This test method is not appropriate for leachables that do not diffuse through agar or agarose.
1.1.2 While the agar layer can act as a cushion to protect the cells from the specimen, there may be materials that are sufficiently heavy to compress the agar and prevent diffusion or to cause mechanical damage to the cells. This test method would not be appropriate for these materials.
1.2 The L-929 cell line was chosen because it has a significant history of use in assays of this type. This is not intended to imply that its use is preferred, only that the L-929 is an established cell line, well characterized and readily available, that has demonstrated reproducible results in several laboratories.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard5 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
These test methods are appropriate for qualifying absorbent pads used with membrane filters for bacteriological enumeration.
The test methods described are applicable to quality control testing of absorbent pads by the suppliers and users of these pads and to specification testing of absorbent pads intended for use with membrane filters in bacteriological enumeration.
Other pure culture organisms and their appropriate culture medium may be substituted for the E. coli and M-FC media for specification testing, as required.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the determination of the nutrient-holding capacity and the toxic or nutritive effect on bacterial growth of organisms retained on a membrane filter, when the absorbent pad being tested is used as a nutrient reservoir and medium supply source for the retained bacteria.
1.2 The tests described are conducted on 47-mm diameter disks, although other size disks may be employed for bacterial culture techniques.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Standard3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The technique produces a chemical-precipitation reaction between the phencyclidine or its analogues and the precipitating reagent. The habit and the aggregation of the crystals formed may be used to distinguish phencyclidine or its analogues from other drugs.
The technique can be utilized on phencyclidine or its analogues present in either the salt or free base form.
The technique does not distinguish between salt and free base forms.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide describes some standard procedures applicable to the analysis of phencyclidine and its analogues using microcrystal tests (1-8).
1.2 These procedures are applicable to phencyclidme and its analogues which are present in solid dosage form or in a liquid form. They are not typically applicable to the analysis of phencyclidine and its analogues in biological samples.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.4 This standard cannot replace knowledge, skill, or ability acquired through appropriate education, training, and experience and should be used in conjunction with sound professional judgment.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Guide4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide4 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This technique produces a chemical-precipitation reaction between cocaine and the precipitating reagent. The habit and the aggregation of the crystals formed may be used to distinguish cocaine from other drugs (6).
This technique can be utilized on cocaine present in either the salt or free base form.
This technique does not distinguish between the salt and free base forms.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide describes some standard procedures applicable to the analysis of cocaine using multiple microcrystal tests (1-5).
1.2 These procedures are applicable to cocaine, which is present in solid dosage form or an injectable liquid form. They are not typically applicable to the analysis of cocaine in biological samples.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.4 This standard cannot replace knowledge, skill, or ability acquired through appropriate education, training, and experience and should be used in conjunction with sound professional judgment.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
- Guide3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off