BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Visual inspection of the instrument channel has been proposed as a quality assurance step during endoscope reprocessing. However, the nature and severity of findings in a broad array of endoscopes (gastroscopes, colonoscopes, duodenoscopes, and echoendoscopes) after systemic implementation of an inspection protocol remain unknown. In addition, a study using borescope inspection in upper endoscopes and colonoscopes raised concerns about persistent simethicone residue despite full reprocessing. METHODS: A pilot inspection study using a prototype borescope (SteriCam Inspection Scope; SteriView Inc, San Rafael, Calif) was performed on routinely used endoscopes after high-level disinfection, manual forced-air dry of the instrument channel, and overnight vertical storage. Video recordings 1.5 to 2 minutes in duration were reviewed for visible moisture, debris, discoloration, scratches, channel shredding (scratches that result in strips or filaments of the channel lining protruding into the lumen), and visible evidence of biofilm or simethicone residue. RESULTS: A total of 97 inspections of 59 endoscopes were reviewed. The most common finding was scratches, seen in 51 devices (86%). Channel shredding was found in 35 devices (59%). Intrachannel debris was identified in 22 (23%) of the 97 inspections. No moisture was seen (0%) in the 74 inspections performed after forced-air dry and overnight vertical storage compared with moisture in 5 of 18 inspections (28%) performed after storage alone. No visual evidence of biofilm or simethicone residue was discovered despite its frequent use in our unit. CONCLUSION: Internal defects of the instrument channel appear to occur frequently. Manual forced-air drying of the channel appears to be highly effective in eliminating moisture compared with overnight hang drying alone. Video inspection of the endoscope channel may be useful to audit reprocessing performance and to identify damaged endoscopes.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Visual inspection of the instrument channel has been proposed as a quality assurance step during endoscope reprocessing. However, the nature and severity of findings in a broad array of endoscopes (gastroscopes, colonoscopes, duodenoscopes, and echoendoscopes) after systemic implementation of an inspection protocol remain unknown. In addition, a study using borescope inspection in upper endoscopes and colonoscopes raised concerns about persistent simethicone residue despite full reprocessing. METHODS: A pilot inspection study using a prototype borescope (SteriCam Inspection Scope; SteriView Inc, San Rafael, Calif) was performed on routinely used endoscopes after high-level disinfection, manual forced-air dry of the instrument channel, and overnight vertical storage. Video recordings 1.5 to 2 minutes in duration were reviewed for visible moisture, debris, discoloration, scratches, channel shredding (scratches that result in strips or filaments of the channel lining protruding into the lumen), and visible evidence of biofilm or simethicone residue. RESULTS: A total of 97 inspections of 59 endoscopes were reviewed. The most common finding was scratches, seen in 51 devices (86%). Channel shredding was found in 35 devices (59%). Intrachannel debris was identified in 22 (23%) of the 97 inspections. No moisture was seen (0%) in the 74 inspections performed after forced-air dry and overnight vertical storage compared with moisture in 5 of 18 inspections (28%) performed after storage alone. No visual evidence of biofilm or simethicone residue was discovered despite its frequent use in our unit. CONCLUSION: Internal defects of the instrument channel appear to occur frequently. Manual forced-air drying of the channel appears to be highly effective in eliminating moisture compared with overnight hang drying alone. Video inspection of the endoscope channel may be useful to audit reprocessing performance and to identify damaged endoscopes.
Authors: Gheorghe G Balan; Catalin Victor Sfarti; Stefan Andrei Chiriac; Carol Stanciu; Anca Trifan Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Marguerite J Kutyla; Ayesha Shah; Jerome Elson; Vera Meeusen; Sam O'Connor; Luke F Hourigan; Gerald J Holtmann Journal: Indian J Gastroenterol Date: 2019-07-17
Authors: Maria Luisa Cristina; Marina Sartini; Elisa Schinca; Gianluca Ottria; Chiara Dupont; Palmira Bova; Gianni Coccia; Beatrice Casini; Anna Maria Spagnolo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-12-24 Impact factor: 3.390
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