Share this article on:

Evaluation of Needle and Syringe Combinations

JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes: March 1st, 1997 - Volume 14 - Issue 3 - p 294-297
Letters to the Editor

To the Editor: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission among injecting drug users (IDUs) is commonly attributed to the practice of sharing contaminated needles and syringes(1). The minimal infectious dose of HIV is unknown, but the volume of innoculum and quantity of virus in an exposure are believed to influence the risk of transmission(2-5). Both factors may be affected by the type of syringe used by an IDU. As an ethnographer(1989-92) and IDU (1968-87), one author (WZ) observed a change in syringes used by IDUs in Texas during the HIV epidemic. Syringes in current use have permanently attached needles and retain visibility less fluid and blood than syringes with detachable needles used previously.

Prior studies(6-8) have quantified the amount of blood in needle and syringe sharing simulations; the type of needle, detachable or integral cannula (permanently attached), was not specified. Only one study(8) incorporated the practice, common among IDUs, of rinsing with water between uses. We measured differences in fluid and blood retained in needle and syringe combinations in a series of experiments.

Back to Top | Article Outline

METHODS

Four needle and syringe combinations shown inTable 1 were evaluated. To determine the volume of fluid retained, 20 syringes of each type were weighed using an electronic P160N Mettler balance. Each syringe with needle was weighed new and dry, and filled with 1 ml of deionized water. Water was expelled by fully depressing the plunger, and each syringe was reweighed. To simulate intravenous drug injection and syringe rinsing, 0.5 ml of 1× phosphate-buffered saline (PBS/drug solution) was drawn into each syringe. Air was expelled for a final volume of 0.4 ml. The needle was inserted into a tube of human blood of a known red blood cell count with ethylene diaminetetra-acetic acid (EDTA) anticoagulant and the plunger was drawn back 0.1 ml (registering/checking that the needle was in the vein). Contents of the syringe were expelled (injection), and an additional 0.1 ml of blood was drawn into the syringe and expelled(booting/flushing). The syringe was then rinsed twice with 0.5 ml of fresh PBS and the second rinse collected. The experiment was repeated with 10 syringes of each type. Manual red blood cell counts were performed on each final rinse using an improved Neubauer hemocytometer. Statistical analysis was performed using single-factor analysis of variance.

TABLE 1

TABLE 1

Back to Top | Article Outline

RESULTS

With the plunger fully depressed, syringes with detachable needles retained over 40 times as much fluid as integral cannula syringes. In simulations using whole blood and two PBS rinses, syringes with detachable needles retained a minimum of 300 times as much blood as integral cannula syringes. Table 2 presents mean volumes of fluid and blood retained in each needle and syringe combination.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, no one has addressed the effect of syringe type on HIV transmission among IDUs. If the volume of inoculum and the quantity of virus in an exposure affect the probability of infection, then integral cannula syringes are a less efficient means of transmission and thus a safer instrument for drug injection. Needle exchanges should be encouraged to distribute integral cannula syringes only and IDUs using syringes with detachable needles should be warned of the higher risks.

TABLE 2

TABLE 2

*William A. Zule

†Kathleen M. Ticknor-Stellato

*David P. Desmond

*Kenneth N. Vogtsberger

*Department of Psychiatry University of Texas Health Science Center at San AntonioDepartment of Psychiatry University Hospital San Antonio, Texas

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Lange WR, Synder FR, Lozovsky D, Kaistha V, Kaczaniuk MA, Jaffe JH. The geographic distribution of human immunodeficiency virus markers in parenteral drug abusers. Am J Public Health 1988;78:443-6.
2. Sattar SA, Springthorpe VS. Survival and disinfectant inactivation of the human immunodeficiency virus: a critical review. Reviews of Infectious Diseases 1991;13:430-47.
3. Gerberding JL. AIDS and the health care provider: coping with risks, fears, and risk reduction strategies. In: Rapoza N, ed. HIV infection and disease. Chicago: American Medical Association, 1989.
4. Hu DJ, Kane MA, Heymann DL. Transmission of HIV, hepatitis B virus, and other bloodborne pathogens in health care settings: a review of risk factors and guidelines for prevention. Bull World Health Organ 1991;69:623-30.
5. Chin J. Present and future dimensions of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In: Rossi GB, Beth-Giraldo E, Chieco-Bianchi L, Dianzani F, Giraldo G, Verani P, eds. Science challenging AIDS. Basel: Karger, 1992:33-50.
6. Hoffman PN, Larkin DP, Larkin DS. Needlestick and needleshare—the difference [letter]. J Infect Dis 1989;160:545.
7. Napoli VM, McGowan JE. How much blood in a needlestick? [letter]. J Infect Dis 1987;155:828.
8. Gaughwin MD, Gowans E, Ali R, Burrell C. Bloody needles: the volumes of blood transferred in simulations of needlestick injuries and shared use of syringes for injection of intravenous drugs. AIDS 1991;5:1025-7.
© Lippincott-Raven Publishers.