Variation in Bacterial Contamination of Microisolation Cage Tops According to Rodent Species and Housing System

Effects of Extended Cage Component Sanitation Interval on the Microenvironment, Health, and Gastrointestinal Microbiome of Rats (Rattus norvegicus)

Washing and sanitizing rodent cage components requires costly equipment, significant personnel effort, and use of natural resources. The benchmark frequency for sanitation of individually ventilated caging (IVC) has traditionally been every 2 wk. In this study, we investigated the effects of extending this interval on the cage microenvironment, basic markers of health, and the gastrointestinal microbiota of rats. We compared our institutional standard of changing the sanitation interval for rat cage lids, box feeders, and enrichment devices from every 4 wk to an interval of 12 wk. The cage bottom and bedding continued to be changed every 2 wk for both groups. We hypothesized that we would find no significant difference between our current practice of 4 wks and continuous use for 12 wk. Our data showed that intracage ammonia levels remained below 5 ppm for most cages in both groups, with the exception of cages that experienced a cage flood. We found no significant difference between groups in bacterial colony forming units (CFU) on cage components. We used 3 novel methods of assessing cleanliness of enrichment devices and found no significant effect of continuous use for 12 wk on the number of CFU. In addition, we found no significant differences between groups for animal weight, routine blood work, or fecal and cecal microbiomes. These data indicate that a sanitation interval of up to 12 wk for components of rat IVC caging has no significant effects on the microenvironment or health of rats. Using the longer interval will improve efficiency, reduce the use of natural resources, and decrease costs while maintaining high-quality animal care.

Comparison of Floor Cleaning and Disinfection Processes in a Research Animal Facility

Floor cleaning and disinfection are essential components of maintaining animal health status and meeting regulatory requirements in research vivaria. However, best practices for method, frequency, and evaluation techniques have not been established. Reuse of cotton string mop and bucket systems has been implicated in spreading contamination in the human hospital setting. We evaluated 4 different combinations of disinfectant and mop systems commonly used in rodent vivaria. Eight housing rooms were mopped a total of 4 times using one of the following methods: quaternary ammonium compound (QUAT) and cotton string mop (QC), QUAT and microfiber mop (QM), hydrogen peroxide disinfectant (HPD) and cotton string mop (HC), or HPD and microfiber mop (HM). ATP and RODAC samples of the floor were taken before and after mopping. The time to mop each room, floor drying time, and the amount of disinfectant used were recorded. The QC method was associated with significantly more bacterial contamination while all other methods significantly reduced bacterial contamination. The QC method performed significantly worse in reducing bacterial contamination as compared with all other methods when cotton mop heads were reused. All methods except QC significantly reduced ATP levels, with the HC and HM methods being significantly more effective at reducing ATP levels than the QC and QM methods. Costs were similar for the QC, QM, and HM methods. The results of this study indicate that reuse of cotton string mop heads with QUAT increases floor contamination while HPD is effective for up to 3 reuses. Single use microfiber mops were effective with both QUAT and HPD but did not result in more effective cleaning or disinfection than cotton string mops.

Assessing Accumulation of Organic Material on Rodent Cage Accessories

According to the 8th edition of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (the Guide), rodent cage accessories, such as filter tops, should be sanitized at least once every 2 wk. We performed a study to test the hypothesis that organic contamination (measured by ATP content, expressed as relative light units (RLU)) of cage accessories (wire bar inserts and filter top lids) does not differ at 2 wk (14 d) as compared with 30, 60, and 90-d time points after cage change even when in constant use. An additional time point for filter top lids of 180 d after cage change was also evaluated. Eight groups were studied: the wire bar inserts and filter top lids used for mice and rats, in both static and individually ventilated cages (IVC). When analyzing data from both mouse and rat static and IVC caging, we found that the mean RLU values for mouse IVC and rat static and IVC cage components were below 100,000 RLU at the 14-d time point. The mean value for the mouse static group was slightly above 100,000 RLU at this time point. Based on this observation, we considered 100,000 RLU to be an appropriate actionable level. We concluded that changing wire bar inserts at least every 14 d, as recommended in the Guide for sanitizing these components in mouse and rat static cages, may be considered acceptable. This interval could be extended for mouse and rat IVC cages up to 90 d while remaining below this limit. Filter top lids for mouse static cages should be changed at least every 30 d, but static rat and IVC mouse/rat filter top lids could be changed up to every 180 d, while still staying below this actionable level of contamination.