Comparation of ETO Sterilizer and Pulsating Vacuum Sterilizer
This article is based on the actual needs of medical sterilization scenarios, and systematically compares the technical characteristics of ethylene oxide (ETO) sterilizers and pulsating vacuum sterilizers from three dimensions: applicability, safety, and operational efficiency, providing reference for hospital equipment selection.
1, Comparison of Applicable Sterilization Product Scope
The core advantages of ETO sterilizer
Broad spectrum compatibility: It can handle all instruments that are not resistant to high temperatures (below 50 ℃), including flexible endoscopes (such as gastroscopes), catheters with cavities, electronic devices, etc. The gas permeability ensures the sterilization effect of complex structures.
Material protection: No damage to easily deformable materials such as rubber, plastic, silicone, etc., extending the service life of precision instruments.
Packaging adaptation: Supports direct sterilization of packaging materials such as paper plastic bags and non-woven fabrics, achieving a seamless connection between sterilization and storage
Limitations of pulsating vacuum sterilizers.
Only applicable to high temperature resistant items: suitable for metal surgical instruments, glass products, etc. (withstanding high temperatures of 134 ℃), but may cause plastic melting and rubber aging.
Insufficient penetration: Steam is difficult to penetrate multi-layer packaging or long lumen instruments, posing a risk of sterilization blind spots.
2, Safety comparison
Risk Control of ETO Sterilizer
Gas management: fully sealed cabin design+real-time concentration monitoring, automatic activation of emergency exhaust in case of leakage
Residual analysis: Built in catalytic decomposition device ensures that the concentration of ethylene oxide is ≤ 0.1ppm before opening the cabin
Operation protection: Mandatory training system and protective equipment (goggles, respirators) are provided in conjunction
Safety performance of pulsating vacuum sterilizer
No chemical risk: relying solely on high-temperature steam, with no residual toxic gases
Burn prevention: Automatic door lock and temperature alarm system reduce operational risks
3, Comparison of sterilization convenience
Efficiency optimization of ETO sterilizer
Intelligent scheduling: night loading+automatic parsing function, achieving a turnover mode of “off work start on work retrieval”
Batch processing: can hold up to 30kg of equipment at a time, suitable for centralized sterilization needs
Traceability management: barcode associated sterilization parameters, electronic records comply with JCI certification requirements
The speed advantage of pulsating vacuum sterilizer
Fast cycle: Standard cycle of 30-60 minutes, suitable for rapid turnover of emergency equipment
Low energy consumption: saving about 40% of energy consumption compared to ETO
4, Suggestions for typical application scenarios
Recommended technical types, taboo scenarios, ETO sterilizers, endoscopy centers, catheterization rooms, implant sterilization, emergency surgical instrument turnover, pulsating vacuum operating rooms, metal instruments, cloth dressings, sterilization of instruments containing electronic components or plastics.
Conclusion: ETO sterilizers have become the preferred choice for sterilizing complex instruments due to their low-temperature compatibility and penetration advantages; Pulsating vacuum is known for its fast and efficient processing, making it suitable for handling conventional high-temperature resistant items. Modern hospitals suggest configuring two types of equipment to complement each other.
No comment