Background: Microbiological quality of topical products comprises both, the microbiological purity of the unopened product and the efficacy of the antimicrobial preservation system. Objective: Subsequent to an outbreak of invasive Paecilomyces lilacinus mycosis among patients of an isolation ward, probably caused by a contaminated skin care product, the microbiological quality of different skin care products from the market was investigated. Methods: The different products were investigated for their efficacy of antimicrobial preservation in general and especially against P. lilacinus according to a pharmacopoeial routine method slightly adopted for the purpose of this investigation. Results: The products did partially not comply with the British Pharmacopoeia 1993 test for efficacy of antimicrobial preservation. The antimicrobial preservation systems were less effective against P. lilacinus than against the pharmacopoeial reference germs. The antimicrobial preservation efficacy decreased towards the end of the shelf-life of the product. A decreased P. lilacinus inoculum dose was related to an increased growth of the micro-organisms. Conclusion: Topical products are, unless not labelled otherwise, non-sterile preparations and their preservation systems are only tested against pharmacopoeial key micro-organisms. The microbiological behaviour following contamination with other germs remains unknown.

Keywords:
Paecilomyces lilacinus, In-use stability, Preservatives, Microbial quality, Efficacy of antimicrobial preservation
1.
Itin PH, Frei R, Lautenschlager SA, et al: Cutaneous manifestations of Paecilomyces lilacinus infection induced by a contaminated skin lotion in patients who are severely immunosuppressed. J Am Acad Dermatol 1998;39:401–409.
2.
Orth B, Frei R, Itin PH, et al: Outbreak of invasive mycoses caused by Paecilomyces lilacinus from a contaminated skin lotion. Ann Intern Med 1996;125:799–806.
3.
Microbiological Quality of Pharmaceutical Preparations, European Pharmacopoeia – Supplement 1999, ed 3. Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 1999, pp 202–203.
4.
Efficacy of Antimicrobial Preservation, European Pharmacopoeia – Supplement 1999, ed 3. Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 1999, pp 201–202.
5.
Efficacy of Antimicrobial Preservation, British Pharmacopoeia 1993. London, HMSO, 1993, pp A191–192.
6.
Anelich LE, Korsten L: Survey of micro-organisms associated with spoilage of cosmetic creams manufactured in South Africa. Int J Cosmet Sci 1996;18:25–40.
7.
Krieg R, Pletscher W: Mikrobiologische Kontamination von Salben auf Intensivpflegestationen im Kanton Zürich. Pharm Acta Helv 1987;62:242–246.
8.
Daschner F: Bepanthen-Salbe häufig kontaminiert. Internist Prax 1986;26:202.
9.
Noble WC, Savin JA: Steroid cream contaminated with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Lancet 1966;i:347–349.
10.
Brannan DK, Dille JC: Type of closure prevents microbial contamination of cosmetics during consumer use. Appl Environ Microbiol 1990;56:1476–1479.
11.
Brannan DK: Packaging’s role in preservation. Cosmet Toiletries 1998;113(April):79–90.
12.
Leitman J: Packaging ideas for cosmetics. Cosmet Toiletries 1998;113(May):47–53.
13.
Morse LJ, Williams HL, Grenn FP, Eldridge EE, Rotta JR: Septicemia due to Klebsiella pneumoniae originating from a hand-cream dispenser. N Engl J Med 1967;277:472–473.
14.
Morse LJ, Schonbeck LE: Hand lotions – A potential nosocomial hazard. N Engl J Med 1968;278:376–378.
15.
Safranek TJ, Jarvis WR, Carson LA, et al: Mycobacterium chelonae wound infections after plastic surgery employing contaminated gentian violet skin-marking solution. N Engl J Med 1987;317:197–201.
16.
Becks VE, Lorenzoni NM: Pseudomonas aeruginosa outbreak in a neonatal intensive care unit: A possible link to contaminated hand lotion. Am J Infect Control 1995;23:396–398.
© 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
2001
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.