Review

Volume 11, Issue 4, 2021, 11553 - 11561

https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

High-Pressure Processing in Food

1 2 3,*
Shakiba Narjabadi Fam , Kianoush Khosravi-Darani , Ramona Massoud , Armita
4
Massoud
1 Department of Food Science and Technology, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran;
[email protected] (S.N.F.);
2 Research Department of Food Technology, National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Faculty of

Nutrition Sciences and Food Technology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran;
[email protected] (K.K.D.);
3 Department of Food Science and Technology, Iran Standard Organization Tehran, Iran; [email protected] (R.M.);
4 Department of medicine, Tehran medicine university, Tehran, Iran; [email protected] (A.M.);

* Correspondence: [email protected];
Scopus Author ID 57038566400
Received: 27.10.2020; Revised: 30.11.2020; Accepted: 5.12.2020; Published: 12.12.2020

Abstract: Thermal processing has been the most common method in food processing technology, but
it has eliminated the quality of fresh type food (nutritionally and sensorial). Therefore, the non-thermal
methods emerged, and High-Pressure Processing (HPP), applying 100 to 1000 MPa for a short period,
is the most popular one due to maintaining the food's nutritional and sensory characteristics extending
the shelf-life well as eliminating the level of the microorganism. HPP is an environmentally friendly
technology that helps to decrease energy consumption. It can be used in nearly all food industries, from
milk to meat, as a novel preserving method. This article reviews the effects of this innovative processing
technology on food quality. The microbial effects in some food categories and extending the shelf life
are explained. HPPs’ advantages and limits compared to thermal processing are highlighted.

Keywords: high pressure; processing; microorganism; food; quality.

© 2020 by the authors. This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction

High-pressure processing (HPP) is a way to process foodstuffs where food goes under
high pressures up to 900 MPa. It can be used in the food industry alone or with some other
conventional techniques [1]. HPP is a novel non-thermal process to stop pathogenic spoilage
related to food [2]. In High-pressure processing, known as high hydrostatic pressure, liquids
and solid foods are subjected to 100 to 900 MPa pressure, which is a high pressure and would
be so specialized for preventing certain enzymes' growth microorganisms in food. By the HPP
processing, foods will remain more fresh and desirable than the other thermal processes [3].
Nowadays, there is an increasing trend for more fresh and nutritious food around the
world. HHP processing does not affect the physical, chemical, and sensory properties of
foodstuffs [4]. For preventing microbial and chemical changes in food, it should be treated with
processing technologies so the food products would suit the customers’ needs while keeping
the main quality [5]. A number of the assorted techniques that can be used for preserving food
are as follows: heat adding or removing, dehydration, freezing, and applying salt, sugar [6].
For having food in distant markets, they should be converted to more stable forms. In this way,
the most important issue is the shelf life. The unwanted changes in food products’ quality would
be prevented by controlling the enzymatic, physiochemical, and microbiological activities [5].

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11553
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

Applying heat treatment is so common and easy. However, it also affects the sensory properties
and physicochemical characteristics of foodstuff and sensory evaluations. So there was a need
for some substituted methods, non-thermal treatments [1]. Amongst non-thermal processing
methods such as HPP, pulsed lights, pulse electric field pasteurization, pulsed magnetic field,
and ozone treatment, HPP is popular in food processing not only due to its’ capacity in food
preservation but also the potential of having functional effects [7].
There are small changes during HPP processing, it may affect the non-covalent bonds
like hydrogen and also hydrophobic bonds. However, it has no effects on small
molecules like amino acids and flavor compounds [1]. Because of the presence of covalent
bonds in vitamins, minerals, and flavor compounds, they are rarely influenced by HPP
processing; therefore, there are small changes in food qualities like color, flavor, and nutritional
value [8]. The application of foods processed with HPP has been improved enormously. It has
been applied as an effective commercial process for different food industries like dairy, meat,
juices, seafood, jams, fruit, and vegetables [7].

2. HPP Technology

HPP puts high hydrostatic pressure into food through an internal vessel for a specified
period of time to inactivate noxious spoilage microorganisms and enzymes. The pressure range
from 100 to 1000 MPa, while the atmospheric is nearly 0.1 MPa [9]. This
methods’ temperature differs from 0 to 100°C. The lower temperatures are used for sensitive
heat products that needed to be preserved [7].
HPP is a helpful technique for preserving foods from unwanted enzymes and also
harmful microorganisms but, at the same time, keep safe useful compounds like probiotics,
antioxidants, and lactoferrin [10-12]. Applying HPP is so interesting and fruitful to the food
researchers due to the advantages and opportunities to make new products. The growing trend
of this process in the food industry is because of its’ other name as the “cold”
pasteurization technique, which helps to inactivate the harmful microorganisms without any
changes in nutritional values [13].
HPP is generated through three ways [14]: Direct compression by
dynamic pressure in pistons; Indirect compression by static pressure seals; Through heating
the pressure medium.
The HPP operation is similar to a thermal retort and consists of compression, loading,
protecting, and decompression. The foodstuff is put into a vessel and then compressed to the
required pressure level and held for the needed time period and after that decompress-ed.
Usually, products are held at 300 -600 MPa for 3-5 min. HHP strain vessels are geared up that
can be easily used in a short time for loading [15]. HPP process's main factors are pressure,
time, temperature, required stress, and decompression time. The product pH, water activity,
and packaging material are also important [1].
In this method, the pressure is uniformly and continuously passed through the food
samples that depend on the sample's shape and size, which is HPPs’ priority to thermal
processing [4]. No heat in this processing provides nearly no changes; in the end, nutritional
and sensory properties [16]. Therefore, the effect of this unique method on the quality of
foodstuffs is describing in this article.

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11554
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

3. HPP Effect On Some Food Quality

3.1. Physiochemical properties.

HPP processing has great impacts on the number of food products [7]. HPP eliminates
the physiochemical changes, preserving the color, texture, flavor, and freshness [17]. Some
beneficial effects of HPP on food components are mentioned:

3.1.1. Lipids.

HPP treatment (400 – 600 MPa) on canned fish showed a reduction of FFA content
(around 50%) during 6-15 months of the frozen storage period, so HPP's inhibitory effect on
lipid hydrolysis has been proved in canned fish. Also, the lower peroxide formations have been
described in different kinds of canned fish species treated with HPP (p < 0.05). These effects
were observed to be higher by raising the level of pressure during frozen storage [18]. FFAs
accumulation through lipid hydrolysis in fish has no nutritional value. During the frozen fish
storage, their presence leads to changes in texture, increases in lipid oxidation, and therefore
off-flavor and taste in canned fish [19].

3.1.2. Vitamin C.

HPP protects the ascorbate molecules better than thermal treatments in food products.
By this treatment, only less than 5% of vitamin C in orange juice was reduced and lower than
10% of the initial vitamin C content in different fruit products [20-22]. This result would be
related to the enzymes (peroxidase, ascorbate oxidase) inactivation through pressure. Also, it
shows that the stability of vitamin C juices treated with HPP depends on the food matrix, fruit
variety, juicing procedure, and the HPP parameters (orange variety) [20]. Amazingly the
vitamin C retention in HPP treatments (200-400 MPa) was greater than 90% [23]. By
increasing pressure, the amounts of lactic and acetic acids increase [24].

3.1.3. Health-promoting compounds.

HPP has a positive effect on the number of flavonoids. HPP (200-400) showed a
significant increase of total flavonoids (34%) in orange juice (p < 0.05). This effect has been
attributed to the increasing of the membrane permeability and cell walls disruption. Then,
bioactive compounds release and increase their extractability [20]. The effect of HPP depends
on the food matrix, processing characteristics, and geographical fruit origin. Therefore, the
HPP can produce high-quality orange juices with higher flavonoids as this treatment would
increase the extraction of valuable flavonoids [25].
As compared with the other extraction techniques, HPP method showed
higher efficiency (90%) in lycopene extraction from tomato waste using high pressure (500
MPa for 1 min) [24, 26].
The two common food wastes with valuable phenolic compounds are olive pomace and
grape marc. Olive pomace is made from the solid residual pulp and seeds of olive during its’
oil production. Grape marc extracting from seeds and skins is nearly 25 kg in each hundred kg
of grape [27, 28]. It is reported that using HPP for extraction of olive pomace and grape marc
showed higher yield. Also, Corrales et al. discovered that using the high pressure for
anthocyanin extraction from red grape skin ended in better antioxidant levels (nearly 3 times)
https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11555
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

compare to other extraction methods [29]. Some other studies showed indicated
less extreme pressure, about 300 MPa, is needed for phenolic and antioxidant
content extraction from citrus peel [30].

3.1.4. Mycotoxin.

HPP is a potential tool in reducing mycotoxin contents in foodstuffs such as HPP treated
(400-600 MPa) patulin (PAT) in different fruit juices. It was reported that the most effective
pressure level was 600 MPa for 300s that decreased the PAT from 200 to 60 μg/L in sample
juices [31], and the possibility of PAT (100 μg/L) degradation in apple juices by HPP and
pulsed HPP process was reported as 60 and 72% respectively [32].
The reduction of Aflatoxins (AFs) in HPP treated peanuts after 30 days of storage period.
The AFs value after treatment was 0.26 μg/g, respectively. These values were reported to be
much lower than the control sample (9.08 μg/g) [33]. Additionally, Deoxynivalenol (DON)
and Zearalenone (ZEA) reduction were reported in maize samples after HPP treatment (550
MPa for 20 min), which was almost 100% [34].

3.1.5. Starch Gelatinization-Balakrishn 2020.

Some studies have suggested that using HPP results in reducing the gelatinizing
temperature of starch. The higher the pressure, the greater the reduction in [35]. Starch swells
up and loses its structure and crystallinity after heating in water. In contrast, the structure of
the starch granules is maintained by HPP gelatinization [36].
After HPP treatment, starch gels showed better stability after storage compared to the
thermally treated ones, and pressure treatment acted on more stable crystallites. HPP makes
denser gels with a lower grade of retrogradation. HPP (100 – 500 MPa) treated starch has
shown better emulsion stabilization properties and higher digestibility [37].

3.1.6. Sensory attributes.

HPP can protect the quality of fresh fruit cuts (color, smell, texture, and nutritional value)
through inactivating microorganisms and enzymes [38]. It was reported that there was a
decrease in the total plate count (about 3 log) in pineapples’ fresh-cut by using a pressure
treatment (340 MPa) for 15 min [39]. Similarly, the browning in mango cuts was regulated by
the application of 800 MPa for 5 min [40]. HPP has been proved to preserve fruit juices and
fruit drinks at an industrial scale with an amazing shelf-life. By applying HPP (350 MPa) at
30°C for 1 min, the orange juice shelf life was increased for more than 2 months in the
refrigerator [41]. Many types of research have been done on the HPP influences on the quality
of meat and its’ products, like; the color of beef [42], structural changes in pork [43], microbial
inactivation in beef [44], and the oxidation of lipids in beef and poultry [45, 46].

3.2. Microbial properties.

HPP is an effective, preserving method for food products. HPP's important factors in
microorganisms’ inactivation are pressure, temperature, and holding time [47]. The HPP
conditions for the inactivation of some microorganisms in various foodstuffs are mentioned
[44]. HPP inactive the microbial cells completely by damaging the microbial cells and
destabilizing the cell membrane under the effect of high pressure. HPP also affects the proteins
and enzymes that resulted in the inactivation of microorganisms [48]. The inactivation of
https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11556
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

pathogenic microorganisms in meat by HPP relates to some parameters like pH, water activity,
salt content, pressure, processing time, and temperature [49]. In General, it is reported that
gram negatives in their growth phase are weaker than gram positives. The 10 to 50 MPa
pressure can reduce the growth rate, and the higher pressure levels would cause the
microorganism inactivation [48]. HPP causes the cell walls disruption and, therefore, the
intracellular constituents’ leakage. High pressure (more than100 MPa) makes the cells unable
to attach together again after the pressure release. The amount of destruction depends on the
membrane structure and bacterial strains [50].
Escherichia coli, the indicator pathogen, needs to at least a 5-log reduction with the
combination of time and pressure to ensure the food safety issue [51]. In fruit juices and
vegetable products, HPP treatment can make a 5-log reduction of Ecoli, which is needed for
pasteurized juices' safety requirements as mentioned in Hazard Analysis and Critical Control
Point (HACCP) regulation [52]. In HPP treated acai juice at 400 MPa for 3 min, over 6 log
reductions in E. coli, Salmonella, and L. monocytogenes were observed. The most sensitive
pathogen among the microorganisms in acai juice was L. monocytogenes that successfully a
decrease of 6 log was reported at 400 MPa was 1 min [53]. The HPP (600 MPa) for 3 min is
needed to effectively reduce Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat meat products [51]. HPP
(400 MPa for 1 min) at 20 °C declined over 6 logs of L. innocua, but E. coli needed 10 min to
be reduced the same at the same pressure conditions [33].
Also, HPP is a potent tool in fungi spores inactivation and delay their growth rate.
Applying HPP (600 MPa) along with ultrasound (24 kHz) for 30 min on strawberry pureé
inactivated the ascospores of Byssochlamys Nivea, a thermal resistant mycotoxins-producing
mold, effectively [54]. In addition, some researchers reported that HPP (600MPa) and
ultrasound (24 kHz) together inactivated spores of Neosartorya fischeri, another thermal
resistant mycotoxin-producing mold on apple juice samples [55]. HPP treatment (600-800
MPa) was observed to inhibit the growth of mycotoxigenic fungi A. flavus in peanuts [33].
Amazingly using HPP improved the probiotic bacteria’s viability in probiotic products,
which is an important issue. Using HPP, positive results were found in probiotic yogurt
production with the desired viability of probiotic bacteria. In a study, the milk for yogurt
production homogenized at 100, 150, and 200 MPa. Viability of L actobacillus
acidophilus and Bifidobacterium lactis increased during storage (P < 0.05) [56].

4. HPP advantages and disadvantages

HPP has some advantages over the other processings as reducing process time and
decreasing the heat damage problems, maintaining the color, flavor, and freshness of food
products. Also, there is no loss in vitamin C, and other functional changes are diminished
compared to the traditional thermal methods [57].
HPP would extend the shelf lives, apply less energy, and have the best processing
efficiency for pumpable foodstuffs than other technologies. HPP process can be managed in
final packaging that prevents post-processing contamination. The processing time would
eliminate and interestingly the inactivation of microorganisms and enzymes that occurred at
low temperatures whilst the nutritious materials like vitamins, antioxidants, colors, and flavors,
are unaffected [58].
HPP also decreases the need to use chemical preservatives due to avoiding microbial
contaminations. Therefore, the food products using HPP technology have an appeal in

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11557
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

consumers these days [59]. Table 1 represents the inactivation of some microorganisms by HPP
in some foodstuffs.
There are some challenges with this technology, like HPP's incapability for inactivating
spores [60]. Applying the combination of heat and HPP (pressure-assisted temperature
sterilization or high-pressure sterilization) would be a solution for this problem [61]. Other
challenges are the lack of practical knowledge about the interaction between several food
constituents, packaging issues, shelf life, and high pressure [61-63]. The most significant
limitation of this technology is the high cost; the HPP equipment is expensive and needs high
investment depending on the equipment types [64, 65].

Table 1. Inactivation of some microorganisms by HPP.

Microorganism Media Inactivation HPP condition Ref.
rate P T t
(log CFU) (MPa) (°C) (min)
L. monocytogenes 1.2
Salmonella Beef 6.8 550 12 2 44
E. coli 4.4
E. coli Poultry meat 3 600 20 15 45
S. aureus 3
C. jejuni Pork 6 300 25 10 43
Y. enterocolitica 6
E. coli Shrimp 1.5 435 20 25 7
S. aureus 1.1
S. typhimurium Yogurt - 300 25 9 56
E. coli Mango juice 6 250 20 8 40
E. coli Apple juice 6 400 10 5 55

5. Conclusions

As a novel technology in preserving food, HPP has achieved success in the food
industry and consumers’ demand for fresh processed foods. HPP is likely to be applied widely
due to being a natural alternative for other food industry processing. Compared with thermal
processing, HPP maintains more nutrients, color, and flavor compounds. The consumers ask
for more natural, healthier food. There are still some issues with this valuable technology, the
lack of sufficient knowledge about food constituents' interaction, and the between high
pressure. There is still also a need for more researches on this food due to high consumer
acceptance.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

This research has no acknowledgment.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Abera, G. Review on high-pressure processing of foods. Cogent Food Agric. 2019, 5, 1-10,
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2019.1568725.

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11558
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

2. Pérez-Andrés, J.M.; Charoux, C.m.M.; Cullen, P.; Tiwari, B.K. Chemical modifications of lipids and
proteins by non-thermal food processing technologies. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2018, 66, 5041-5054,
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.7b06055.
3. Balasubramaniam, V.B.; Martinez-Monteagudo, S.I.; Gupta, R. Principles and application of high pressure–
based technologies in the food industry. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 6, 435-462,
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-022814-015539.
4. Bevilacqua, A.; Campaniello, D.; Speranza, B.; Altieri, C.; Sinigaglia, M.; Corbo, M.R. Two Nonthermal
Technologies for Food Safety and Quality—Ultrasound and High Pressure Homogenization: Effects on
Microorganisms, Advances, and Possibilities: A Review. J. Food Prot. 2019, 82, 2049-2064,
https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-19-059.
5. Daher, D.; Le Gourrierec, S.; Pérez-Lamela, C. Effect of high pressure processing on the microbial
inactivation in fruit preparations and other vegetable based beverages. Agriculture 2017, 7, 72-78,
https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture7090072.
6. Ramaswamy, H.S.; Tessema, A. Achieving food security through reduction in postharvest losses of
indigenous foods and enhancing manpower training opportunities: Canada-Ethiopia experience. In:
Proceedings of Food Innovation Asia conference 2010: Indigenous food research and development to global
market, as a part of ProPak Asia 2010, BITEC, Bangkok, Thailand, 2010.
7. Chauhan, O. Non-thermal processing of foods. 1st ed.; CRC Press: USA, 2019; pp. 16-88,
https://doi.org/10.1201/b22017.
8. Barba, F.J.; Terefe, N.S.; Buckow, R.; Knorr, D.; Orlien, V. New opportunities and perspectives of high
pressure treatment to improve health and safety attributes of foods. A review. Food Res. Int. 2015, 77, 725-
742, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.05.015.
9. Niakousari, M.; Gahruie, H.H.; Razmjooei, M.; Roohinejad, S.; Greiner, R. Effects of innovative processing
technologies on microbial targets based on food categories: Comparing traditional and emerging
technologies for food preservation. In: Innovative technologies for food preservation. 1st ed.; Academic
Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States, Volume 1, 2018; pp. 133-185,
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811031-7.00005-4.
10. Matser, A.M.; Krebbers, B.; van den Berg, R.W.; Bartels, P.V. Advantages of high pressure sterilisation on
quality of food products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2004, 15, 79-85,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2003.08.005.
11. Penna, A.; Barbosa-Cánovas, G. High hydrostatic pressure processing on microstructure of probiotic low-
fat yogurt. Food Res. Int. 2007, 40, 510-519, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2007.01.001.
12. Da Cruz, A.G.; Faria, J.d.A.F.; Saad, S.M.I.; Bolini, H.M.A.; Sant, A.S.; Cristianini, M. High pressure
processing and pulsed electric fields: potential use in probiotic dairy foods processing. Trends Food Sci.
Technol. 2010, 21, 483-493, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.07.006.
13. Parekh, S.L.; Aparnathi, K.; Sreeja, V. High pressure processing: A potential technology for processing and
preservation of dairy foods. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci 2017, 6, 3526-3535,
https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.612.410.
14. Huang, H.-W.; Yang, B.B.; Wang, C.-Y. Effects of high pressure processing on immunoreactivity and
microbiological safety of crushed peanuts. Food Control 2014, 42, 290-295,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.02.030.
15. Pottier, L.; Villamonte, G.; de Lamballerie, M. Applications of high pressure for healthier foods. Curr. Opin.
Food Sci. 2017, 16, 21-27, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2017.06.009.
16. Abe, S.; Takimoto, S.; Yamamuro, Y.; Tau, K.; Takenaga, F.; Suzuki, K.; Oda, M. High-pressure and heat
pretreatment effects on rehydration and quality of sweet potato. Am. J. Food Technol. 2011, 6, 63-71,
https://doi.org/10.3923/ajft.2011.63.71.
17. Massoud, R.; Belgheisi, S.; Massoud, A. Effect of high pressure homogenization on improving the quality
of milk and sensory properties of yogurt: a review. Int. J. Chem. Eng. Appl. 2016, 7, 66-70,
https://doi.org/10.7763/IJCEA.2016.V7.544.
18. Prego, R.; Fidalgo, L.G.; Saraiva, J.A.; Vázquez, M.; Aubourg, S.P. Impact of prior high-pressure processing
on lipid damage and volatile amines formation in mackerel muscle subjected to frozen storage and canning.
LWT 2020, 135, 10-15, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2020.109957.
19. Vázquez, M.; Fidalgo, L.G.; Saraiva, J.A.; Aubourg, S.P. Preservative effect of a previous high-pressure
treatment on the chemical changes related to quality loss in frozen hake (Merluccius merluccius). Food
Bioproc. Tech. 2018, 11, 293-304, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-017-2010-4.
20. De Ancos, B.; Rodrigo, M.J.; Sánchez-Moreno, C.; Cano, M.P.; Zacarías, L. Effect of high-pressure
processing applied as pretreatment on carotenoids, flavonoids and vitamin C in juice of the sweet oranges
‘Navel’ and the red-fleshed ‘Cara Cara’. Food Res. Int. 2020, 132, 105-109,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109105.
21. Plaza, L.; Sánchez-Moreno, C.; Elez-Martínez, P.; de Ancos, B.; Martín-Belloso, O.; Cano, M.P. Effect of
refrigerated storage on vitamin C and antioxidant activity of orange juice processed by high-pressure or
pulsed electric fields with regard to low pasteurization. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2006, 223, 487-493,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-005-0228-2.

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11559
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

22. Sánchez-Moreno, C.; Plaza, L.; Elez-Martínez, P.; De Ancos, B.; Martín-Belloso, O.; Cano, M.P. Impact of
high pressure and pulsed electric fields on bioactive compounds and antioxidant activity of orange juice in
comparison with traditional thermal processing. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 4403-4409,
https://doi.org/10.1021/jf048839b.
23. Guerrero-Beltrán, J.A.; Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V.; Swanson, B.G. High hydrostatic pressure processing of fruit
and vegetable products. Food Rev. Int. 2005, 21, 411-425. https://doi.org/10.1080/87559120500224827
24. Massoud, R.; Fadaei, N.V.; Khosravi, D.K. The effect of homogenization pressure and stages on the amounts
of Lactic and Acetic acids of probiotic yoghurt. Appl. Food Biotechnol. 2014, 1, 25-29,
https://doi.org/10.22037/afb.v2i1.7209.
25. Fernández-Jalao, I.; Sánchez-Moreno, C.; De Ancos, B. Effect of high-pressure processing on flavonoids,
hydroxycinnamic acids, dihydrochalcones and antioxidant activity of apple ‘Golden Delicious’ from
different geographical origin. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2019, 51, 20-31,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2018.06.002.
26. Xi, J. Effect of high pressure processing on the extraction of lycopene in tomato paste waste. Chem. Eng.
Technol. 2006, 29, 736-739.
27. Passos, F.; García, J.; Ferrer, I. Impact of low temperature pretreatment on the anaerobic digestion of
microalgal biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 138, 79-86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.03.114.
28. Paini, M.; Casazza, A.A.; Aliakbarian, B.; Perego, P.; Binello, A.; Cravotto, G. Influence of ethanol/water
ratio in ultrasound and high‐pressure/high‐temperature phenolic compound extraction from agri‐food waste.
Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 51, 349-358.
29. Corrales, M.; Han, J.H.; Tauscher, B. Antimicrobial properties of grape seed extracts and their effectiveness
after incorporation into pea starch films. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2009, 44, 425-433.
30. Casquete, R.; Castro, S.; Villalobos, M.; Serradilla, M.; Queirós, R.; Saraiva, J.; Córdoba, M.; Teixeira, P.
High pressure extraction of phenolic compounds from citrus peels. High. Press. Res. 2014, 34, 447-451,
https://doi.org/10.1080/08957959.2014.986474.
31. Hao, H.; Zhou, T.; Koutchma, T.; Wu, F.; Warriner, K. High hydrostatic pressure assisted degradation of
patulin in fruit and vegetable juice blends. Food Control 2016, 62, 237-242,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.10.042.
32. Avsaroglu, M.; Bozoglu, F.; Alpas, H.; Largeteau, A.; Demazeau, G. Use of pulsed-high hydrostatic pressure
treatment to decrease patulin in apple juice. High. Press. Res. 2015, 35, 214-222,
https://doi.org/10.1080/08957959.2015.1027700.
33. Pokhrel, P.R.; Toniazzo, T.; Boulet, C.; Oner, M.E.; Sablani, S.S.; Tang, J.; Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V.
Inactivation of Listeria innocua and Escherichia coli in carrot juice by combining high pressure processing,
nisin, and mild thermal treatments. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2019, 54, 93-102
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2019.03.007
34. Kalagatur, N.K.; Kamasani, J.R.; Mudili, V.; Krishna, K.; Chauhan, O.P.; Sreepathi, M.H. Effect of high
pressure processing on growth and mycotoxin production of Fusarium graminearum in maize. Food Biosci.
2018, 21, 53-59, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbio.2017.11.005.
35. Balakrishna, A.K.; Farid, M. Enrichment of rice with natural thiamine using high-pressure processing (HPP).
J. Food Eng. 2020, 283, 11-14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2020.110040.
36. Narenderan, S.; Meyyanathan, S.; Babu, B. Review of pesticides residue analysis in fruits and vegetables.
Pre-treatment, extraction and detection techniques. Food Res. Int. 2020, 133, 133-140,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109141.
37. Wazed, M.A.; Farid, M. Hypoallergenic and low-protein ready-to-feed (RTF) infant formula by high
pressure pasteurization: a novel product. Foods 2019, 8, 408-411, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8090408.
38. Yordanov, D.; Angelova, G. High pressure processing for foods preserving. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip.
2010, 24, 1940-1945, https://doi.org/10.2478/V10133-010-0057-8.
39. Aleman, G.; Farkas, D.F.; Torres, J.A.; Wilhelmsen, E.; Mcintyre, S. Ultra-high pressure pasteurization of
fresh cut pineapple. J. Food Prot. 1994, 57, 931-934, https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-57.10.931.
40. Boynton, B.B.; Sims, C.; Sargent, S.; Balaban, M.; Marshall, M. Quality and stability of precut mangos and
carambolas subjected to high‐pressure processing. J. Food Sci. 2002, 67, 409-415.
41. Donsi, G.; Ferrari, G.; Di Matteo, M. High pressure stabilization of orange juice: evaluation of the effects of
process conditions. Ital. J. Food Sci. 1996, 8, 99-106.
42. Carlez, A.; Veciana-Nogues, T.; Cheftel, J.-C. Changes in colour and myoglobin of minced beef meat due
to high pressure processing. LWT 1995, 28, 528-538, https://doi.org/10.1006/fstl.1995.0088.
43. Wackerbarth, H.; Kuhlmann, U.; Tintchev, F.; Heinz, V.; Hildebrandt, P. Structural changes of myoglobin
in pressure-treated pork meat probed by resonance Raman spectroscopy. Food Chem. 2009, 115, 1194-1198,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.01.027.
44. Jofré, A.; Aymerich, T.; Grèbol, N.; Garriga, M. Efficiency of high hydrostatic pressure at 600 MPa against
food-borne microorganisms by challenge tests on convenience meat products. LWT 2009, 42, 924-928,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2008.12.001.

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11560
 https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC114.1155311561

45. McArdle, R.A.; Marcos, B.; Kerry, J.P.; Mullen, A.M. Influence of HPP conditions on selected beef quality
attributes and their stability during chilled storage. Meat Sci. 2011, 87, 274-281,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.10.022.
46. Kruk, Z.A.; Yun, H.; Rutley, D.L.; Lee, E.J.; Kim, Y.J.; Jo, C. The effect of high pressure on microbial
population, meat quality and sensory characteristics of chicken breast fillet. Food Control 2011, 22, 6-12,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2010.06.003.
47. Scheinberg, J.A.; Svoboda, A.L.; Cutter, C.N. High-pressure processing and boiling water treatments for
reducing Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli O157: H7, Salmonella spp., and Staphylococcus aureus
during beef jerky processing. Food Control 2014, 39, 105-110,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.11.002.
48. Woldemariam, H.W.; Emire, S.A. High Pressure Processing of Foods for Microbial and Mycotoxins Control:
current trends and future prospects. Cogent Food Agric. 2019, 5, 16-22,
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2019.1622184.
49. Rendueles, E.; Omer, M.; Alvseike, O.; Alonso-Calleja, C.; Capita, R.; Prieto, M. Microbiological food
safety assessment of high hydrostatic pressure processing: A review. LWT 2011, 44, 1251-1260,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2010.11.001.
50. Bernaerts, T.M.; Gheysen, L.; Foubert, I.; Hendrickx, M.E.; Van Loey, A.M. Evaluating microalgal cell
disruption upon ultra high pressure homogenization. Algal Res. 2019, 42,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2019.101616.
51. Huang, H.-W.; Hsu, C.-P.; Wang, C.-Y. Healthy expectations of high hydrostatic pressure treatment in food
processing industry. J. Food Drug Anal. 2020, 28, 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfda.2019.10.002.
52. De Oliveira, T.L.C.; Ramos, A.L.; Ramos, E.M.; Piccoli, R.H.; Cristianini, M. Natural antimicrobials as
additional hurdles to preservation of foods by high pressure processing. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 45,
60-85, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2015.05.007.
53. Gouvea, F.S.; Padilla-Zakour, O.I.; Worobo, R.W.; Xavier, B.M.; Walter, E.H.; Rosenthal, A. Effect of high-
pressure processing on bacterial inactivation in açaí juices with varying pH and soluble solids content. Innov.
Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2020, 66, 102-112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2020.102490.
54. Silva, F. Inactivation of Byssochlamys nivea ascospores in strawberry puree by high pressure, power
ultrasound and thermal processing. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2015, 214, 129-136,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2015.07.031.
55. Kim, H.; Silva, F. Modeling the inactivation of Neosartorya fischeri ascospores in apple juice by high
pressure, power ultrasound and thermal processing. Food Control 2016, 59, 530-537,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.06.033.
56. Massoud, R.; Fadaei, V.; Khosravi‐Darani, K.; Nikbakht, H.R. Improving the viability of probiotic bacteria
in yoghurt by homogenization. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2015, 39, 2984-2990.
57. Marszałek, K.; Woźniak, Ł.; Kruszewski, B.; Skąpska, S. The effect of high pressure techniques on the
stability of anthocyanins in fruit and vegetables. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 277-283,
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms18020277.
58. Sharma, P.; Gaur, S.N.; Arora, N. In silico identification of IgE-binding epitopes of osmotin protein. PLoS
One 2013, 8, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054755.
59. Muntean, M.-V.; Marian, O.; Barbieru, V.; Cătunescu, G.M.; Ranta, O.; Drocas, I.; Terhes, S. High pressure
processing in food industry–characteristics and applications. Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia 2016, 10, 377-383,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.09.077.
60. Ardia, A. Process considerations on the application of high pressure treatment at elevated temperature
levels for food preservation. Doctoral thesis, Technical University of Berlin, Germany, 2004,
http://dx.doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-840.
61. Rastogi, N.; Raghavarao, K.; Balasubramaniam, V.; Niranjan, K.; Knorr, D. Opportunities and challenges in
high pressure processing of foods. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2007, 47, 69-112,
https://doi.org/10.1080/10408390600626420.
62. Marangoni Júnior, L.; Alves, R.M.V.; Moreira, C.Q.; Cristianini, M.; Padula, M.; Anjos, C.A.R. High‐
pressure processing effects on the barrier properties of flexible packaging materials. J. Food Process.
Preserv. 2020 (in press), https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.14865.
63. Rode, T.M.; Rotabakk, B.T. Extending shelf life of desalted cod by high pressure processing. Innov. Food
Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2020 (in press), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2020.102476
64. Alexandre, E.M.; Pinto, C.A.; Moreira, S.A.; Pintado, M.; Saraiva, J.A. Nonthermal food
processing/preservation technologies. In: Saving Food. Galanakis, C.M. Ed. Academic Press: Galanakis
Laboratories, Chania, Greece, Volume 1, 2019; pp. 141-169, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815357-
4.00005-5.
65. Huang, H.-W.; Wu, S.-J.; Lu, J.-K.; Shyu, Y.-T.; Wang, C.-Y. Current status and future trends of high-
pressure processing in food industry. Food Control 2017, 72, 1-8,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.07.019.

https://biointerfaceresearch.com/ 11561