Literature DB >> 28159069

Longitudinal assessment of reprocessing effectiveness for colonoscopes and gastroscopes: Results of visual inspections, biochemical markers, and microbial cultures.

Cori L Ofstead1, Harry P Wetzler2, Otis L Heymann2, Ellen A Johnson2, John E Eiland2, Michael J Shaw3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Flexible endoscopes are currently reused following cleaning and high-level disinfection. Contamination has been found on endoscopes, and infections have been linked to gastrointestinal, respiratory, and urologic endoscopes.
METHODS: This longitudinal study involved visual inspections with a borescope, microbial cultures, and biochemical tests for protein and adenosine triphosphate to identify endoscopes in need of further cleaning or maintenance. Three assessments were conducted over a 7-month period. Control group endoscopes reprocessed using customary practices were compared with intervention group endoscopes subjected to more rigorous reprocessing.
RESULTS: At final assessment, all endoscopes (N = 20) had visible irregularities. Researchers observed fluid (95%), discoloration, and debris in channels. Of 12 (60%) endoscopes with microbial growth, 4 had no growth until after 48 hours. There were no significant differences in culture results by study group, assessment period, or endoscope type. Similar proportions of control and intervention endoscopes (~20%) exceeded postcleaning biochemical test benchmarks. Adenosine triphosphate levels were higher for gastroscopes than colonoscopes (P = .014). Eighty-five percent of endoscopes required repair due to findings.
CONCLUSIONS: More rigorous reprocessing was not consistently effective. Seven-day incubation allowed identification of slow-growing microbes. These findings bolster the need for routine visual inspection and cleaning verification tests recommended in new reprocessing guidelines.
Copyright © 2017 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adenosine triphosphate; Endoscope; Epidemiology

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28159069     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.10.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Infect Control        ISSN: 0196-6553            Impact factor:   2.918


  14 in total

1.  Scoping the scope: endoscopic evaluation of endoscope working channels with a new high-resolution inspection endoscope (with video).

Authors:  Monique T Barakat; Mohit Girotra; Robert J Huang; Subhas Banerjee
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 2.  A global perspective on capsule endoscopy.

Authors:  Tanja Nowak
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-11

3.  Rate and impact of duodenoscope contamination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sara Larsen; Rasmus Vinther Russell; Lotte Klinten Ockert; Stephen Spanos; Helena Strømstad Travis; Lars Holger Ehlers; Anders Mærkedahl
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2020-07-15

4.  Sterile Reverse Osmosis Water Combined with Friction Are Optimal for Channel and Lever Cavity Sample Collection of Flexible Duodenoscopes.

Authors:  Michelle J Alfa; Harminder Singh; Zoann Nugent; Donald Duerksen; Gale Schultz; Carol Reidy; Patricia DeGagne; Nancy Olson
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2017-11-07

5.  Surveillance of Endoscopes: Comparison of Different Sampling Techniques.

Authors:  Lien Cattoir; Thomas Vanzieleghem; Lisa Florin; Tania Helleputte; Martine De Vos; Bruno Verhasselt; Jerina Boelens; Isabel Leroux-Roels
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 3.254

6.  Duodenoscope-Associated Infections beyond the Elevator Channel: Alternative Causes for Difficult Reprocessing.

Authors:  Gheorghe G Balan; Irina Rosca; Elena-Laura Ursu; Adrian Fifere; Cristian-Dragos Varganici; Florica Doroftei; Ioana-Andreea Turin-Moleavin; Vasile Sandru; Gabriel Constantinescu; Daniel Timofte; Gabriela Stefanescu; Anca Trifan; Catalin Victor Sfarti
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2019-06-25       Impact factor: 4.411

Review 7.  Emerging next-generation robotic colonoscopy systems towards painless colonoscopy.

Authors:  Chung-Kwong Yeung; Jo Lk Cheung; Biji Sreedhar
Journal:  J Dig Dis       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.325

Review 8.  Duodenoscope-associated infection prevention: A call for evidence-based decision making.

Authors:  Cori L Ofstead; Brandy L Buro; Krystina M Hopkins; John E Eiland; Harry P Wetzler; David R Lichtenstein
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2020-11-17

9.  High prevalence rate of digestive tract bacteria in duodenoscopes: a nationwide study.

Authors:  Marco J Bruno; Margreet C Vos; Arjan W Rauwers; Anne F Voor In 't Holt; Jolanda G Buijs; Woutrinus de Groot; Bettina E Hansen
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 23.059

10.  Evaluation of an overnight non-culture test for detection of viable Gram-negative bacteria in endoscope channels.

Authors:  Harminder Singh; Donald R Duerksen; Gale Schultz; Carol Reidy; Pat DeGagne; Nancy Olson; Zoann Nugent; Michelle J Alfa
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2019-01-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.