Patent Grant
7179245
This invention relates to flushable body waste collection pouches, and particularly to a biodegradable pouch suitable for use as the toilet-disposable inner pouch of a pouch-within-a-pouch ostomy appliance of the type generally disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,865,819 and in copending U.S. Pat. Appl 10/969,523 claiming priority from provisional application 60/512,760 filed Oct. 21, 2003 and bearing the name of Claudio Giori as a co-inventor. The disposable pouch has a pair of walls secured together along their peripheral edges to define a waste-receiving chamber, and one of the side walls has a body waste receiving opening which communicates with that chamber. External attachment means are provided about the opening for attachment of the pouch (or pouch assembly) to a wearer.
The only inner pouch currently on the market is a pouch available from Welland Medical covered by U.S. Pat. No. 5,938,647. This pouch is made of hot water soluble polyvinylalcohol. The problem with polyvinylalcohol is that it becomes brittle and noisy upon aging and has limited biodegradability. Thus, there is a need for an inner pouch file that is flexible, water impermeable, has low noise (an important requirement for ostomy and fecal incontinence pouches) and good biodegradability.
The walls of a pouch embodying this invention are composed of a thin, heat sealable (including RF sealable) and liquid-impermeable monolayer film of a composition comprising a plasticized biodegradable aliphatic polyester, or a plasticized biodegradable aliphatic-aromatic copolyester, or blends thereof, covered by a water-disintegratable layer of biodegradable and water-dispersible fibers, most preferably cellulosic fibers, bonded thereto. The polyester or copolyester is blended with an aliphatic ester plasticizer such as triethylcitrate or vegetable oil. Such a plasticizer imparts greater flexibility to the film, reduces film noise upon wrinkling, and allows extrusion of the resin into films or coatings as thin as 10 microns (0.8 mil) or less. It has also been found that the presence of the plasticizer effectively increases the rate of biodegradation of the film. Starch may also be used advantageously as a biodegradable plasticizer.
The composition of the film may comprise a blend of about 70% to 95% by weight of the biodegradable aliphatic polyester or aliphatic-aromatic copolyester and 5% to 30% of a biodegradable plasticizer or plasticizers. More desireably, the blend is within the range of about 75% to 93% polyester or copolyester and about 7% to 25% plasticizer(s). A preferred composition is believed to be about 90% polyester or copolyester and about 10% plasticizer(s).
The aliphatic polyester may comprise a polymer made by ring-opening polymerization of a lactone, preferably polycaprolactone. The aliphatic-aromatic copolymer may comprise a condensation product of a glycol with a combination of an aliphatic diacid and aromatic diacid, wherein the aromatic diacid is less than 20% by mole.
To enhance biodegrability, minimize noise, and reduce cost, the film should be ultra-thin, having a thickness no greater than about 40 microns (1.57 mil). A preferred thickness range is believed to be about 6 to 40 microns (0.24 to 1.57 mil) with a more preferred range being about 10 to 35 microns (0.39 to 1.38 mil). Particularly effective results are believed to occur when the thickness range is about 15 to 30 microns (0.59 to 1.18 mil).
The ultra-thin monolayer film, having the advantages and features described above, is reinforced by the water-disintegratable cover layer defining the outer surfaces of the pouch. The cover layer is composed of a random arrangement of water-dispersible fibers, has no non-water-soluble binder (and preferably no binder at all) and has significant dry strength with virtually no elongation but lacks wet strength. Tissue paper having a high cellulosic fiber content, preferably 100%, is believed particularly effective. The monolayer film may be secured uninterruptedly throughout one of its side surfaces to the tissue or other reinforcing substrate by any suitable means. While adhesive attachment (as by a water-soluble and biodegradable adhesive) is considered feasible, it is believed more effective to extrude the polyester or copolyester onto the paper substrate to form a thin but uninterrupted coating thereon or to laminate the two layers together with heat, with the attachment between the opposing surfaces of the two layers in either case being produced with heat and being mechanical in nature. As long as the external surface of the pouch is in a dry state, the tissue paper covering offers mechanical strength, softness, and noise reduction but, upon exposure to water, as when the pouch is discarded into a flush toilet, the tissue disintegrates rapidly and is believed to contribute to flushability by rapidly absorbing water, wetting the film surface, and reducing pouch buoyancy.
An important aspect of this invention lies in the strength, or lack of strength, of the attachment between substantially one entire surface of the cover layer (excluding its peripheral edge portions) and the film that together form each wall of the flushable pouch. (It is along such peripheral edge portions that the layers are securely heat-sealed together to form a completed pouch.) To avoid the formation of unacceptable pinholes in the film, it is essential that none of the fibers of the cover layer extends through the film or even penetrates the film to any appreciable extent. Since the film may be any of a number of different thicknesses, but is ultra-thin in any event, measuring the maximum extent of penetration, if any, is not considered feasible. However, it has been found that no appreciable penetration is achieved, and no pinholes are formed, if the extent of bonding between the paper and film layers is such that the two layers may be peeled away from each other (when dry), with both layers remaining intact, by the application of 180-degree peel forces in the range of about 2 to 10 g/in (0.02 to 0.1 Newtons/in), preferably about 3 to 6 g/in (0.03 to 0.06 Newtons/in). Under such conditions, the layers are found to be bonded together with sufficient strength to maintain the integrity of the pouch wall during use but without risk of unacceptable fiber penetration.
Since the polyester or copolyester films are heat sealable (including RF sealable), the films may be readily converted into pouches using conventional heat sealing methods. Although the film is covered by a soft, flexible and fibrous backing layer as described above, heat sealing is nevertheless readily achieved because the polymeric layers of the pouch walls face inwardly and may therefore be securely welded to each other. Where the pouch serves as the inner pouch of a two-pouch system, it has been found that where the inner pouch has a fibrous and porous cover layer of tissue paper or other suitable fibrous and porous substrate, heat sealing between the film of the inner pouch, the fibrous and porous cover layer, and the film of the outer pouch, as along the peripheral edges of the two pouches, may nevertheless occur. In such a case, the seal between the walls of the outer pouch and the fibrous layer of the inner pouch walls is weaker than the seal between the two walls of the inner pouch, thereby allowing the outer pouch to be torn or peeled away from the inner pouch without adversely affecting the integrity of the inner pouch, at which time the still-intact inner pouch and its contents may be discarded into the water of a toilet bowl to commence the disintegration and biodegradation process.
In such a pouch-in-pouch appliance, where the walls of the flushable inner pouch are composed of thermoplastic film and tissue paper layers weakly bonded together, it is essential that peeling away of the outer pouch not cause delamination of the paper and film layers of the inner pouch since, as already noted, the paper layer is believed to contribute significantly to the flushability of the inner pouch. Also, retention of the soft paper layer by the inner pouch provides tactile benefits for the user who must handle and remove the inner pouch for toilet disposal, as well as assuring the user that the step of peeling away of the outer pouch walls has not compromised the integrity of the inner pouch. An important aspect of this invention therefore lies in avoiding the risks of such delamination by selecting a thermoplastic material for the outer pouch that has a melting temperature greater than that of the thermoplastic material of the inner pouch. Since the fibers of the non-thermoplastic cover layer penetrate the thermoplastic films of both pouches in the zone of the peripheral heat seal, and since the thermoplastic material of the inner pouch has a lower melting temperature, the fiber penetration into the film of the inner pouch along the peripheral heat seal is greater than into the film of the outer pouch and insures that the paper layer will preferentially remain with the inner pouch as the walls of the outer pouch are peeled away.
The peripheral heat seal therefore simultaneously joins the multiple layers together in different ways to achieve peelability of the outer pouch walls away from the fibrous cover layer of the inner pouch, the retention of the fibrous cover layer by the inner pouch, and the true heat-sealing or welding together of the walls of the inner pouch along their peripheral edges.
Other features and advantages of the invention will become apparent as the specification proceeds.
The polyester or copolyester film material of an ostomy pouch or fecal incontinence pouch embodying this invention is obtained by chemical synthesis rather than by a fermentation process. Polyester or copolyester films produced by a fermentation process are considered unsuitable because they tend to be brittle and cannot be converted into thin flexible films. Examples of synthetic biodegradable polyesters are aliphatic polyesters such as polycaprolactone (“Tone” from Dow Chemical) and aliphatic-aromatic copolyesters with less than 20% by mole of aromatic diacid component (“Estar Bio” from Eastman Chemical, “Ecoflex” from BASF). A synthetic biodegradable polyester precompounded with biodegradable plasticizers and suitable for thin film extrusion is available commercially from Petroplast Vinora under the designation “KF02B”.
Referring to
The appliance 10 includes a faceplate 17 having a soft, pliant adhesive layer 18 for adhesive attachment to the peristomal skin surfaces of a wearer. A cover film 19 extends over the pouch-facing surfaces of the faceplate's adhesive layer 18, and a stoma-receiving opening 20 is provided in the faceplate in alignment with the opening 14 in the pouch. Attachment means 21 is schematically illustrated in
Pouch 10 has its walls 11 and 12 formed of an ultra-thin heat-sealable (including RF sealable) liquid and gas impermeable film 23 externally bonded to a thin water-disintegratable cover layer 24. As previously stated, the film 23 is of a composition comprising a biodegradable, thermoplastic and heat-sealable, aliphatic polyester, or aliphatic-aromatic copolyester, or blends thereof, combined with a biodegradable plasticizer or combination of such plasticizers. The soft, flexible, water disintegratable cover layer 24 is composed of a random arrangement of water-dispersible non-thermoplastic fibers, preferably cellulosic fibers, and has significant tensile strength when dry but lacks such strength when wet, all as already described. The two layers are mechanically bonded together, preferably by heat, in such a way that despite the ultra-thin character of the film and the fibrous nature of the cover layer, there is no significant penetration of the fibers into the film and no formation of pinholes through the film. While some very limited penetration of the fibers into the film may exist to produce the weak mechanical bond between the layers, the penetration is so slight and the bonding forces so weak that the two layers (when dry) may be easily peeled apart with each layer remaining intact during and following such a peeling operation. More specifically, the mechanical attachment between the film and cover layer must be sufficiently weak to allow separation by the application of a 180 degree peeling force of about 2 to 10 g/in (0.02 to 0.1 Newtons/in), preferably about 3 to 6 g/in (0.03 to 0.06 Newtons/in), when tested in accordance with TAPPI Test Method UM502 (1991), all with little or no evidence of fiber retention by the film. Under such circumstances, the separated film will be free of pinholes that might otherwise cause fluid (liquid) leakage of the laminated two-layer product in use.
The water-disintegratable cover layer of non-thermoplastic water-dispersible fibers also plays an important role when the pouch serves as the inner pouch of a two-pouch (pouch-in-pouch) appliance as shown in
As brought out in the aforementioned copending application, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference herein, the peripheral seal 13′ and the seal 30 about stoma openings 14, 14′ are peelable seals that allow the proximal and distal walls 11′ and 12′ of the outer pouch to be peeled away from the inner pouch without disrupting the integrity of the peripheral seal that holds the walls of the inner pouch together. Thus, the walls of the outer pouch may be peeled away to expose the biodegradable inner pouch 10 so that the latter may be discarded along with its contents into a flush toilet. The outer pouch 10′, which may or may not be biodegradable, may then be placed into any suitable waste receptacle.
As already noted, the fibrous and porous water-disintegratable layer 24 and the film layer 23 that together form the walls of the inner pouch have their major surfaces areas only weakly bonded together, allowing them to be separated intact from each other with the application of only limited peeling force. However, that does not include the peripheral heat seal zone 13′ of the pouch shown in
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) can be used to measure the melting point of candidate film materials and to predict if a certain combination of films might be suitable for the inner and outer pouches. For example, it has been found that a biodegradable plasticized polyester available from Petroplast Vinora under the designation KF02B has a DSC melting peak of 65 degrees C. A known multilayer barrier film currently used commercially for ostomy pouches has a heat-sealable skin layer of poly(ethylene vinylacetate) (EVA) with a DSC melting peak of 88 degrees C. Because of this difference in melting temperatures, it is possible to control heat sealing conditions so that the tissue layer in the peripheral areas of the pouch walls exhibits a stronger bond with the inner pouch film than with the outer pouch film following a heat sealing operation (including RF sealing). As a result, the outer pouch can be peeled away without causing separation of the tissue layer from the inner pouch film. A melting temperature differential of at least 10 degrees C. is believed to be needed to control layer separation.
To facilitate the step of manually peeling away the proximal and distal walls of outer pouch 10′, such walls may be provided with gripping tabs (not shown) that project outwardly beyond the peripheral edges of inner pouch 10.
The walls of the inner pouch must be impermeable to fluid and solid body wastes, and the biodegradable plasticized polyesters or copolyesters described herein perform that function well. Biodegradable polyesters or copolyesters, while generally considered gas impermeable, nevertheless allow diffusion of odors to an extent that renders them, without some protective means, unsuitable for body waste collection pouches intended for more than extremely short durations of use. A plasticized biodegradable polyester or copolyester pouch in the condition shown in
As described above, cover layer 24 of inner pouch 10 is of a porous material that is supportive when dry but has low wet strength. It should also be soft and flexible. Tissue paper that has a high percentage (preferably 100%) of cellulosic fibers is preferred such as, for example, a cellulosic tissue paper of the type available from Shawano Specialty Papers having a basis weight of 14 lb/ream. Absence of a binder is desirable because a binder may interfere with or retard the rate of disintegration, but a limited amount of a binder that is non-thermoplastic and readily soluble or disintegratable in water, such as starch, may be acceptable. The porous tissue layer for each wall 11 and 12, when such layer is in a dry state, provides reinforcement, softness, and noise reduction for the thin thermoplastic film of the inner pouch and is believed to contribute to the flushability of the film when the inner pouch is separated from the outer pouch and discarded into a flush toilet.
As believed evident from the above, the method of making a pouch-in-pouch waste collection appliance embodying this invention involves the steps of selecting a thermoplastic material for the film of the inner pouch that has a melting temperature substantially lower than that of the thermoplastic material for the film of the outer pouch and then joining together peripheral portions of the walls of the two pouches by simultaneously applying pressure and heat so that the film material of the inner pouch melts and invades the pores of the fibrous cover layer to a greater extent than the film material of the outer pouch. At the same time, the opposing or inwardly-facing film layers of the inner pouch become fused to each other, forming a true heat seal or weld between the walls of the inner pouch. Upon the subsequent application of peeling forces, the walls of the outer pouch may then be peeled away from those of the inner pouch without causing separation of the porous cover layer and film layer of the inner pouch and without disrupting the integrity of the inner pouch. The exposed inner pouch and its contents are then discarded into a flush toilet.
It will be noted from
Other features and advantages of the invention will become apparent from the following examples:
Two methods are particularly suitable for the production of the tissue/film laminate of pouch 10: (1) extrusion coating onto tissue paper (1 step), and (2) film extrusion followed by lamination of the film to tissue paper (2 steps). Extrusion coating may be accomplished using a Davis Standard extrusion coating line. Tissue paper is used as a substrate and the biodegradable polyester is directly extruded onto the tissue in a single step process. With a two-step process, film may be first extruded using a blown film extrusion line and then laminated to paper tissue paper using a Faustel laminator. Lamination is ideally accomplished thermally with no adhesive layer between tissue and film. Both processes (1) and (2) give high quality laminates with no wrinkles or other defects. A two-step process is preferred because it affords better control of the adhesion and interpenetration between tissue and film. A temperature in the 165° to 220° F. range and a nip pressure in the 40–50 psi range are typically used for lamination. It is from such a laminate that the walls of the pouch may then be die-cut.
Blends of polycaprolactone (“Tone 787” from Dow Chemical) and triethylcitrate (“Citroflex 2” from Morflex Corp.) were compounded and pelletized using a twin-screw compounder extruder. The compounded pellets were converted into film using a cast film line equipped with a 1.25 inch extruder having an L/D ratio of 24:1. Film was extruded at a die temperature of 320° F. The following table illustrates the effect of plasticizer content on tensile modulus and noise at a film thickness of 0.6 mil (15.2 microns):
The data in this table shows that increasing triethylcitrate plasticizer content reduces the modulus of the polycaprolactone film (i.e., increases its flexibility) and reduces the noise of the film. At 20% TEC, however, film blocking, (where the surfaces of adjacent films stick together) becomes a problem. A plasticizer level of 10% is preferred because it provides adequate flexibility and quietness without blocking.
As ostomy pouch suitable for use as the inner pouch of a two-pouch appliance was constructed with a thin, plasticized polycaprolactone film of 0.2 to 0.6 mil (5.1 to 15.2 microns) prepared in accordance with Example 2. The pouch was found to flush well even with a low-volume toilet system (1.6 gal).
Another biodegradable film suitable for fabricating flushable ostomy pouches was formed by heat-lamination of a plasticized biodegradable synthetic polyester film having a thickness within the range of 0.4 to 0.8 mil (10.2 to 20.3 microns) identified as “KF02B” from Petroplast Vinora, Switzerland to a 100% cellulosic tissue having a basis weight of 14 lb/ream (product code no. 3040 from Shawano Specialty Papers).
The improved biodegradability of a polyester film blended with a biodegradable plasticizer is illustrated by-this example.
Biodegradability was tested on film samples consisting of (1) polycaprolactone (“Tone 787” PCL from Dow Chemical) plasticized with triethylcitrate (PCL/TEC weight ratio of 90/10), (2) unplasticized PCL (“Tone 787” from Dow Chemical) and (3) a control sample of polyvinylalcohol film taken from a commercially available flushable inner pouch product (“Impact” flushable ostomy bag from Welland Medical Limited, Crawley, England). The films were exposed to aerobic sewage sludge inoculum in accordance with ASTM test method D-5209. The average weight losses were (1) 64.0%, for the plasticized PCL, (2) 26.1% for the unplasticized PCL, and (3) 12.4% for the control sample.
The plasticized PCL therefore exhibited higher weight loss due to biodegradation than the unplasticized PCL and much higher loss than the commercial PVOH inner pouch material claimed by the manufacturer to be biodegradable.
This example illustrates the conditions required to laminate a tissue paper to a thin biodegradable film without causing pinhole formation in the process.
A biodegradable film from Petroplast Vinora (KF02B, 20 microns thick) and a cellulosic tissue from Shawano Specialty Papers (Product Code 3040, basis weight 14 lb/ream) were heat laminated using a Faustel laminator. The nip pressure was 50 psi, the temperature 220 degrees F., and the line speed 35 to 40 feet per minute. The laminate exhibited a 180 degree peel strength in the 3–6 g/in range.
The laminate was tested for pinholes as follows: A sample of the laminate was laid on a flat surface with the film side facing up. A blue dye solution was applied on the surface of the film. After 5 minutes the film was turned over and the tissue side inspected. If pinholes were present, the dye solution would have wicked into the tissue producing visible blue dots. The test showed no evidence of pinholes. As the laminator line speed was decreased or the nip pressure increased, the peel strength became progressively higher with evidence of residual fibers embedded in the film and pinholes appeared in the dye wicking test.
This example illustrates the resistance to deformation imparted by tissue lamination to a thin biodegradable film.
The load at 1% and 2% strain was measured in accordance with ASTM D882-02 for the film-tissue laminate of Example 6 and for the film of Example 6 without tissue. Results are illustrated in the following table:
This example illustrates differences in heat sealing properties of films suitable for use in pouch-in-pouch appliances embodying the invention. Materials suitable for the walls of the inner pouch are heat-sealable biodegradable films of 20 microns thickness of plasticized polyester from Petroplast Vinora (KBF02B). A thermoplastic material suitable for the walls of the outer pouch is a commercial multilayer barrier film for ostomy pouches having a heat-sealable skin layer of EVA. In each test, two layers of the same film material were heat sealed together, or sought to be heat sealed together, for an interval of 1.2 seconds with a sealing element maintained at different selected temperatures and at a sealing pressure of 4 bar. Following cooling the strength of the seal (if any) was tested by manually peeling apart, or attempting to peel apart, the two layers. The results of such tests are given below:
The term “Peel” as used in the chart means that the two layers had limited adherence to each other but could nevertheless be separated or peeled apart with each layer remaining intact. “Full Seal” means that the layers had become welded or fused together and could not be so separated. The chart reveals that the KF02B film had significantly lower heat sealing temperatures than the control film. This is consistent with the DSC melting temperatures discussed earlier.
While in the foregoing I have disclosed embodiments of the invention in considerable detail for purposes of illustration, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that many of such details may be varied without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 01550 | Oct 2003 | DK | national |
This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/512,759 filed Oct. 21, 2003 and Danish Patent Application Serial No. 2003/01550, filed Oct. 21, 2003.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3934587 | Gordon | Jan 1976 | A |
| 4213458 | Nolan et al. | Jul 1980 | A |
| 4372311 | Potts | Feb 1983 | A |
| 4518087 | Goglio | May 1985 | A |
| 4687711 | Vietto et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
| 4762738 | Keyes et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
| 4816027 | Gilchrist et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
| 4826493 | Martini et al. | May 1989 | A |
| 4906495 | Martini et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
| 4946720 | Oishi et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
| 5009648 | Aronoff et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5104390 | Yum et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5108807 | Tucker | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5110390 | Martini et al. | May 1992 | A |
| 5227415 | Masuda et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
| 5254607 | McBride et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
| 5391423 | Wnuk et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
| 5407979 | Wu et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5417677 | Schneider et al. | May 1995 | A |
| 5422387 | Toms et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
| 5423782 | Wolrich | Jun 1995 | A |
| 5446079 | Buchanan et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5468526 | Allen et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5470526 | Wilfong et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5540962 | Suskind | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5591144 | Smith et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5674578 | Giori | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5679421 | Brinton, Jr. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5690622 | Smith et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5753782 | Hammond et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5776120 | Shelley et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5785695 | Sato et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5786408 | Kuroda et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5821286 | Xu et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5865819 | Cisko, Jr. et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5889140 | Watanabe | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5912059 | Jones et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5938647 | Smith | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5939467 | Wnuk et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5969089 | Narayan et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6033758 | Kocher et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6075118 | Wang et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6127512 | Asrar et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6156929 | Chandler et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6248380 | Kocher et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6248442 | Kong et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6514602 | Zhao et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6552162 | Wang et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 7045183 | Amano et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 20020064614 | Turnbull | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020197425 | Wolf et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20040059306 | Tsal et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1022127 | Jul 2000 | EP |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20050084634 A1 | Apr 2005 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60512759 | Oct 2003 | US |
