The vast and increasing range of
Legionella diseases and the isolation and identification of species and serogroups of this bacterium from environmental sources and patients indicate the global spread of
Legionella species in different countries. Numerous reports of the epidemic and sporadic occurrence of Legionnaires' disease and its related deaths have attracted the attention of researchers and specialists in lung and respiratory diseases, infectious diseases, microbiology, immunology, environment, and genetics (
10).
Early diagnosis of legionellosis and epidemiological conditions in the hospital is necessary not only for correct and effective treatment but also for controlling and preventing the subsequent onset of the disease. It seems that due to the high mortality rate of
Legionella disease, more effective measures should be taken to prevent the spread of
Legionella species from the hospital environment to susceptible patients (
7,
10).
Legionella infections in immunocompromised individuals, corticosteroid recipients, organ transplant receivers, the elderly, children, alcohol and drug addicts, smokers, patients with diabetes mellitus, underlying diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and intubation pose a serious threat to heart patients more than anyone else.
Legionella alone causes a high percentage of nosocomial pneumonia. This bacterium causes 1% to 40% of hospital-acquired pneumonia cases. The mortality rate of legionellosis is 5 - 30%. About 5% of cases of Legionnaires' disease are reported from hospitals (
4,
23).
Legionella pneumophila was the cause of 3.8% of fatal cases of nosocomial pneumonia. Bacteria of the
Legionella genus are isolated from natural water sources, public water reservoirs, water pipes, and even bath showers.
Because various factors are influential in the growth and pathogenicity of
Legionella, the factors affecting the growth and survival of bacteria can be primarily identified, and the findings can be used to design an appropriate control method (
2,
4,
7). Today, various methods are being studied and performed to control
Legionella in hospital and community aquatic environments. Therefore, identifying pathogenic strains in various areas can provide specific ideas for the use of effective and efficient disinfectants to control
Legionella.
In a hospital population, there are always patients who are susceptible to infection and are at high risk for
Legionella. Water is one of the common sources of
Legionella transmission in hospitalized patients. Early diagnosis of legionellosis and epidemiological conditions in the hospital is necessary not only for correct and effective treatment but also to control and prevent the subsequent onset of the disease. It seems that due to the high mortality rate of
Legionella disease, more effective measures should be taken to prevent the spread of
Legionella species from the hospital environment to susceptible patients (
10).
Much research has been done using different methods for removing
Legionella from water. In 2005 studied a variety of disinfectants such as ozone, chlorine dioxide, chlorine, monochloramine, copper, and silver to remove amoebae and planktons and used chlorine oxide to remove
Legionella (
24). Sodium hypochlorite was used to remove
Legionella from water, which has a higher oxidation rate than other disinfectants, affecting a wide range of microorganisms, but it has disadvantages such as carcinogenicity and side effects (
4). Other methods used to remove
Legionella are photocatalytic oxidation (UV at 365 nm) with titanium dioxide. In 2005 used the heat shock method (
20).
In 2008 study used the ionization process of copper and silver as a disinfectant to remove
L. pneumophila (
25). This procedure took four to seven months that was effective in the short term, but the pollution was not eliminated (
25). Diamond electrode electrolysis is used to remove and inactivate
Legionella (
18). In general, the advantages of this research over other research are the long-term bactericidal stability of the George Fischer pipes, no use of chemicals, no carcinogenicity, no corrosion of pipes, no side effects, no need for preparation, and low investment cost.
The results showed that George Fischer pipes and fittings were much less contaminated; out of 34 samples from the George Fischer pipes and fittings system, two samples (samples 20 and 10) showed contamination with Legionella. Thus, the pipe and George Fischer connections showed more than 95% decreases in the growth of L. pneumophila in water, showing the role of this system in controlling infections associated with this bacterium, which causes acute and important problems in the health system, especially in medical centers, hotels, and other administrative, commercial, and recreational centers. Contact with this bacterium and lack of proper treatment can cause the death of infected people.
The results showed that the Ray Ho pipe and fittings system had higher contamination than the George Fischer pipe and fittings system so that out of 22 samples collected from Ray Ho pipe and fittings, 12 samples showed positive Legionella contamination. The results showed that Ray Ho pipes and fittings reduced more than 55% of Legionella contamination, confirming the superiority of the George Fischer pipes and fittings over Ray Ho pipes and fittings.
Examination of Legionella bacterial density in these systems also showed that the George Fischer pipes and fittings are not only less contaminated but also in terms of contamination density than Ray ho pipes and fittings and metal pipes. In the George Fischer pipes and fittings system, only two samples with two bacteria per liter of water were observed, while in Ray Ho and metal pipes, the probability of contamination and bacterial density was high, which indicates the excellent ability of the George Fischer pipes and fittings in controlling Legionella and the inability of these pipes to control Legionella.
The results showed that the average bacterial density in Ray Ho pipe and fittings was more than twice that of the George Fischer pipe and fittings, so Legionella bacterial density in Ray Ho pipe and fittings was in the range of 2 - 16 colonies per liter. In contrast, this density in George Fischer pipe and fittings was only two bacteria per liter, which is even lower than the recommended standards for Legionella density in the piping system of developed countries. A comparison of Legionella density in metal pipes also shows that these pipes are not comparable to George Fischer pipes in terms of both probabilities of contamination and density, so that in these pipes, three out of five samples had contamination. On average, there were more than 43 colonies per liter of water.
The positive results and densities of Legionella bacteria in water samples and their negation in PCR method based on the mip gene indicated the presence of contaminants in water. However, contact with the pipe fittings of George Fischer prevented its growth or caused its destruction. The only evidence of the presence of L. pneumophila DNA in water confirms the effect of George Fischer pipes and fittings in controlling and removing Legionella, which shows that this system is suitable for use in the plumbing of medical centers, hotels, and leisure centers because, in such centers, people are more likely to be exposed to acquired lung pneumonia, which has a high cost of treatment and causes death if not treated properly. The results showed that 28 of the 34 samples of George Fischer pipes and fittings in the culture method were negative but based on a positive mip gene, which indicated VBNC bacterium and L. pneumophila DNA in water, the effect of the tube components on the control of Legionella was proven.
5.1. Conclusions
Legionella stopper pipes and fittings in George Fisher Company have suitable properties for destroying and controlling the growth and density of L. pneumophila in the water supply system of buildings, so it can probably be considered a suitable option for use in piping and water supply systems inside buildings.
5.2. Limitations
One of the limitations of this study was sample collection, financial support, and high research costs.