ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2026
UV-C LED Disinfection of Flexible Rhinolaryngoscopes: Microbiological, Economic, Environmental, and Legislative Evaluation.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the microbiological efficacy of the Ray-Two ultraviolet-C (UV-C) light-emitting diode (LED) chamber for reprocessing flexible rhinolaryngoscopes in otorhinolaryngology (ORL) practice and compare its economic and ecological impacts with chemical high-level disinfection using the Tristel Trio Wipes System (TTWS). Methods: In a prospective study at a tertiary ORL center, bacterial contamination was assessed on 20 flexible rhinolaryngoscopes immediately after routine posterior rhinoscopy and/or laryngoscopy. Paired swab samples were collected from the distal 10-12 cm shaft pre- and post-reprocessing: manual pre-cleaning with tap water followed by a 4-min UV-C LED cycle. Samples were cultured on TSA-5% sheep blood agar for 36 h at 35°C-37°C, with colony-forming units (CFUs) enumerated. Per-cycle costs and carbon footprints were calculated via life cycle assessment (ISO 14040/14044) and compared with TTWS, based on 5000 annual procedures. Results: Pre-reprocessing median CFUs (IQR; range) were 15 (3-27; 2 to > 200), reducing to 0 (0-0; 0-1) post-UV-C ( Conclusion: The Ray-Two UV-C LED chamber achieves near-complete bacterial elimination (100% in 19/20 samples; 1 residual CFU in 1/20 samples) on flexible rhinolaryngoscopes, with superior cost-efficiency and sustainability versus TTWS. This mercury-free, point-of-care method supports greener ORL practice amid evolving EU and US state-level regulations on mercury-containing lamps, enhancing infection control without compromising efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.