I would like to open up a discussion on the validity of tip washing as an option for laboratories to reduce the consumption of plastic, reduce costs and strengthen supply chains.
There are 2 major commercial options for tip washing systems in the market today [certainly not including any in-house solutions that others may have developed][If there are any others, I would appreciate the correction].
Both companies claim similar results:
- Can reduce consumable costs by ~90% versus single-use.
- Some large labs (NIH, CDC, NCI, NCATS) and universities have integrated and validated tip washing with no detectable carry-over in several workflows.
- Validation studies on different assays (LC-MS/MS, ELISA, PCR) reportedly show washed tips perform comparably to new ones when protocols are followed.
Grenova – TipNovus and Related Systems
Grenova's pipette tip washers (e.g., TipNovus, TipNovus Mini, TipNovus X) use customizable wash protocols combining high-pressure flushing, soaking, sonication, UV sanitation, and drying to clean and "sterilize" tips so they can be reused multiple times.
Key claims and features:
- Multiple wash cycles with reagents, UV-C exposure, sonication, and flushing.
- Protocols adaptable to different tip formats (24–384 well).
IonField Systems – PureTIP Plasma Cleaning
IonField's PureTIP products (e.g., PureTIP LHC, PureTIP One) use cold atmospheric plasma to treat tips and pin tools for reuse.
Key claims and features:
- Remove contaminants from plastic surfaces.
- Provide a uniform clean surface with minimal residues.
This technology relies on surface cleaning at room temperature and is designed for high throughput automation platforms, with reportedly rapid cycle times and no additional liquid waste.
Viability in High-Sensitivity and Diagnostic Workflows
Evidence and Adoption
- Grenova claims extensive validation data showing washed tips yield similar precision and accuracy to new tips across multiple analytical methods, including sensitive molecular assays, when proper wash protocols are applied.
- A CDC lab study reported no detectable carryover or contamination in solvent transfer assays using washed tips and maintained volume accuracy after multiple washes.
- Multiple institutions have reported successful reuse up to ~7–20+ cycles with no adverse assay impact (though this will vary with tip type and assay).
Ion Field Systems Plasma cleaning aims to give a surface that is "clean to background" - meaning comparable to new tips for many assays.
Risks & Challenges
Contamination Risk
Regardless of system:
- If wash protocols aren't rigorously validated and monitored, carryover contamination (e.g., trace DNA, proteins, solvents) can occur. Traditional wisdom in molecular labs already cautions against reusing tips for highly contamination-sensitive steps (e.g., PCR) unless fully validated.
- Filters and trap mechanisms in tips may be difficult to clean reliably, meaning some tip types may not be suitable for reuse even with advanced cleaning.
Assay Specificity
- Certain assays (e.g., ultra-trace DNA/RNA amplifications) amplify tiny contaminants into false signals. If a cleaning step leaves even trace contaminants, this can skew results. Detailed, assay-specific validation must demonstrate equivalence.
- Plasma cleaning and wash systems must be proven for the exact tip materials and formats used in your workflows.
Operational Burden
- Setting up, validating, and maintaining cleaning protocols requires time, expertise, and ongoing QC.
- Integration into existing automation can be non-trivial.
Benefits of Tip Washing vs New Tips
|
Factor
|
Washing (Grenova/IonField)
|
New Disposable Tips
|
|
Cost per test
|
Lower (significant savings)
|
Higher
|
|
Plastic waste
|
Reduced drastically
|
High
|
|
Supply chain resilience
|
Less dependency on external tip supply
|
Vulnerable to shortages
|
|
Contamination control
|
Good if validated & rigorously controlled
|
Baseline assumption
|
|
Ease of use
|
Requires training & QC
|
Straightforward
|
|
Regulatory validation burden
|
High upfront
|
Low
|
Key benefits:
- Cost & sustainability: Major reductions in consumables and waste.
- Supply reliability: Useful in scenarios of tip shortages or high throughput demands.
- Potential quality improvements: Some vendors claim plasma cleaning reduces surface effects that can affect precision.
Are the tip washing systems offered by Grenova and IonField viable?
- Yes - with strong validation and when integrated into automated workflows with rigorous QC.
Both companies have documented usage in large research and screening labs with published case studies and reported validations.
Key conditions for successful implementation
- Rigorous, assay-specific validation within your lab (especially for PCR and molecular assays).
- Defined SOPs for when washed tips are acceptable vs when new tips are required.
- Monitoring and tracking usage cycles to prevent degraded tip performance.
- Regulatory documentation for CLIA/CAP compliance.
When to stick with new tips
- High-sensitivity molecular diagnostics (e.g., low copy qPCR/NGS preps) unless tip cleaning is thoroughly validated for those specific steps.
Final Takeaway
✔️ Tip washing technologies can be viable and beneficial in cost and sustainability, but must be implemented with careful validation and monitoring especially in diagnostic workflows.
❗ The risks - mostly contamination and regulatory burdens as these are real and require your lab's own data to ensure confidence.
------------------------------
Chad Jenkins
CEO
PulpFixin
chad.jenkins@pulpfixin.us(408) 888-8436
------------------------------