Transmission of Salmonella enteritidis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography because of inadequate endoscope decontamination

A search strategy for detecting duodenoscope-associated infections: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Duodenoscope-associated infections (DAIs) are exogenous infections resulting from the use of contaminated duodenoscopes. Though numerous outbreaks of DAI have involved multidrug-resistant micro-organisms (MDROs), outbreaks involving non-MDROs are also likely to occur. Detection challenges arise as these infections often resolve before culture or because causative strains are not retained for comparison with duodenoscope strains.

AIM

To identify and analyse DAIs spanning a seven-year period in a tertiary care medical centre.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study. Duodenoscope cultures positive for gastrointestinal flora between March 2015 and September 2022 were paired with duodenoscope usage data to identify patients exposed to contaminated duodenoscopes. Analysis encompassed patients treated after a positive duodenoscope culture and those treated within the interval from a negative to a positive culture. Patient identification numbers were cross-referenced with a clinical culture database to identify patients developing infections with matching micro-organisms within one year of their procedure. A 'pair' was established upon a species-level match between duodenoscope and patient cultures. Pairs were further analysed via antibiogram comparison, and by whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to determine genetic relatedness.

FINDINGS

Sixty-eight pairs were identified; of these, 21 exhibited matching antibiograms which underwent WGS, uncovering two genetically closely related pairs categorized as DAIs. Infection onset occurred up to two months post procedure. Both causative agents were non-MDROs.

CONCLUSION

This study provides crucial insights into DAIs caused by non-MDROs and it highlights the challenge of DAI recognition in daily practice. Importantly, the delayed manifestation of the described DAIs suggests a current underestimation of DAI risk.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Single-Use Duodenoscope Applied to Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

OBJECTIVES

Secondary infections due to transmission via the duodenoscope have been reported in up to 3% of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies. The use of single-use duodenoscopes has been suggested. We investigate the cost-effectiveness of these duodenoscopes use in cholangiopancreatography.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis was implemented to compare the performance of cholangiopancreatographies with reusable duodenoscopes versus single-use duodenoscopes. Effectiveness was analyzed by calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALY) from the perspective of the National Health System. Possibility of crossover from single-use to reusable duodenoscopes was considered. A willingness-to-pay of €25,000/QALY was set, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Considering cholangiopancreatographies with single-use and reusable duodenoscopes at a cost of €2900 and €1333, respectively, and a 10% rate of single-use duodenoscopes, ICER was greater than €3,000,000/QALY. A lower single-use duodenoscope cost of €1211 resulted in an ICER of €23,583/QALY. When the unit cost of the single-use duodenoscope was €1211, a crossover rate of more than 9.5% made the use of the single-use duodenoscope inefficient.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-use duodenoscopes are cost-effective in a proportion of cholangiopancreatographies if its cost is reduced. Increased crossover rate makes single-use duodenoscope use not cost-effective.

An isolated case of nosocomial acquisition of invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella

Non-typhoidal Salmonella spreads to humans via contact with animals or consumption of contaminated animal products, often causing outbreaks of a self-resolving gastroenteritis. Less commonly, it can lead to bacteremia and invasive disease. Nosocomial, person-to-person, and asymptomatic carrier transmission are uncommon in the United States. Reactivation of latent Salmonella in immunocompromised patients is also a known phenomenon. Here, we report a case of an isolated Salmonella bacteremia that developed in an intubated patient with a prolonged hospital course and no clear outbreak or focus of infection. Non-traditional means of transmission and reactivation of latent Salmonella should be considered in the absence of an outbreak phenomenon, especially in patients with multiple comorbidities and immunocompromise.

Criteria for the Use, Processing, and Disposal of Flexible Endoscope Cleaning Brushes

Objectives: To ensure effectiveness in the endoscope channel cleaning process, using functional brushes that are in good condition is necessary. This study sought to identify the criteria for acquiring, using, and disposing of cleaning brushes at endoscopy facilities in Brazil. We further sought to evaluate the conditions of the cleaning brushes in use in the facilities. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted between July 2021 and January 2022. Personnel responsible for processing endoscopes were interviewed regarding the use, processing, and disposal of flexible endoscope cleaning brushes. In addition, the brushes used to clean the equipment were inspected. Results: All participants interviewed reported the practice of brushing endoscope channels. Of them, 60% noted the use of disposable brushes, with 40% using reusable brushes. None of the facilities interviewed reported discarding disposable brushes after use. The protocols for disposal of brushes included disposing due to bristle wear (70%), disposal at the end of the day (20%), and an absence of disposal protocols (10%). In addition, 30% of facilities did not clean the bristles before reintroducing them into the channel/lumen, and no facility had an established routine for cleaning brushes between uses. Inspection of brushes revealed that only 20% of facilities had new brushes with no signs of wear or damage. Conclusion: The use of inappropriate brushes/sponges for cleaning endoscope channels and the lack of criteria for the reuse and disposal of brushes increases the risk of cross-contamination, internal damage to channels, and biofilm formation.

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-Associated Infections: Update on an Emerging Issue

Over 17.7 million gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures are performed annually, contributing to 68% of all endoscopic procedures in the United States. Usually, endoscopic procedures are low risk, but adverse events may occur, including cardiopulmonary complications, bleeding, perforation, pancreatitis, cholangitis, and infection. Infections after the GI endoscopies most commonly result from the patient's endogenous gut flora. Although many studies have reported infection after GI endoscopic procedures, a true estimate of the incidence rate of post-endoscopy infection is lacking. In addition, the infection profile and causative organisms have evolved over time. In recent times, multi-drug-resistant microorganisms have emerged as a cause of outbreaks of endoscope-associated infections (EAI). In addition, lapses in endoscope reprocessing have been reported, with some but not all outbreaks in recent times. This systematic review summarizes the demographical, clinical, and management data of EAI events reported in the literature. A total of 117 articles were included in the systematic review, with the majority reported from North America and Western Europe. The composite infection rate was calculated to be 0.2% following GI endoscopic procedures, 0.8% following ERCP, 0.123% following non-ERCP upper GI endoscopic procedures, and 0.073% following lower GI endoscopic procedures. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most common culprit organism, followed by other Enterobacteriaceae groups of organisms and Gram-positive cocci. We have also elaborated different prevention methods such as antimicrobial prophylaxis, adequate sterilization methods for reprocessing endoscopes, periodic surveillance, and current evidence supporting their utilization. Finally, we discuss disposable endoscopes, which could be an alternative to reprocessing to minimize the chances of EAIs with their effects on the environmental and financial situation.

Risk evaluation of duodenoscope-associated infections in the Netherlands calls for a heightened awareness of device-related infections: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The risk of exogenous infections from endoscopic procedures is often cited as almost negligible (1 infection in 1.8 million procedures); however, this risk is based on older literature and does not seem to match the number of infectious outbreaks due to contaminated duodenoscopes reported after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Using Dutch data, we aimed to estimate the minimum risk of duodenoscope-associated infection (DAI) and colonization (DAC) in patients undergoing ERCP.

METHODS

A systematic literature search identified all DAI outbreaks in the Netherlands reported between 2008 and 2019. Included cases were confirmed by molecular matching of patient and duodenoscope cultures. Risk ratios were calculated based on the total number of ERCPs performed during the study period.

RESULTS

Three outbreaks were reported and published between 2008 and 2018, including 21 confirmed DAI cases and 52 confirmed DAC cases. The estimated number of ERCPs performed during the same period was 181 209-227 006. The calculated minimum estimated DAI risk was approximately 0.01 % and the minimum estimated DAC risk was 0.023 %-0.029 %.

CONCLUSIONS

The estimated risk of DAI in Dutch ERCP practice was at least 180 times higher than previously published risk estimates. The actual risk is likely to be (much) higher due to underreporting of infections caused by multidrug-resistant organisms and sensitive bacteria. Greater awareness by healthcare personnel involved in endoscopy and endoscope cleaning is required, as well as innovative technical solutions to contain and ultimately eliminate DAIs.

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

Background  Recent outbreaks of duodenoscope-associated multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) have brought attention to the infection risk from procedures performed with duodenoscopes. Prior to these MDRO outbreaks, procedures with duodenoscopes were considered safe and low risk for exogenous infection transmission, provided they were performed in strict accordance with manufacturer instructions for use and multisociety reprocessing guidelines. The attention and efforts of the scientific community, regulatory agencies, and the device industry have deepened our understanding of factors responsible for suboptimal outcomes. These include instrument design, reprocessing practices, and surveillance strategies for detecting patient and instrument colonization. Various investigations have made it clear that current reprocessing methods fail to consistently deliver a pathogen-free instrument. The magnitude of infection transmission has been underreported due to several factors. These include the types of organisms responsible for infection, clinical signs presenting in sites distant from ERCP inoculation, and long latency from the time of acquisition to infection. Healthcare providers remain hampered by the ill-defined infectious risk innate to the current instrument design, contradictory information and guidance, and limited evidence-based interventions or reprocessing modifications that reduce risk. Therefore, the objectives of this narrative review included identifying outbreaks described in the peer-reviewed literature and comparing the findings with infections reported elsewhere. Search strategies included accessing peer-reviewed articles, governmental databases, abstracts for scientific conferences, and media reports describing outbreaks. This review summarizes current knowledge, highlights gaps in traditional sources of evidence, and explores opportunities to improve our understanding of actual risk and evidence-based approaches to mitigate risk.

Introduction to Transmission of Infection: Potential Agents Transmitted by Endoscopy

Pathogen contamination of endoscopes depends on pathogen factors, surface factors, and environmental conditions. The most common pathogens associated with transmission and infections associated with gastrointestinal endoscope contamination are Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Biofilm production together with disruption to device surfaces play an outsized role in the risk of contamination. Sampling schemes are limited by these factors, and further developments are needed to improve the accuracy of sampling.

Methods for Endoscope Reprocessing

Over the past 2 decades, in hospital centers worldwide, there have been numerous outbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms that have since been attributed to endoscopic transmission of the infections between patients, primarily from duodenoscopes. These outbreaks have focused the attention of endoscope manufacturers, professional societies, and regulatory agencies on improving the reprocessing of these devices. The key steps in this process are point-of-use precleaning, leak testing, manual cleaning, high-level disinfection, and finally drying and storage. The promise of these initial efforts suggest that the aim of minimizing and ultimately eliminating events of endoscope-/duodenoscope-associated transmission of infectious organisms between patients can be achieved.

Contribution of usage to endoscope working channel damage and bacterial contamination

BACKGROUND

Biofilm formation has been shown to be associated with damaged areas of endoscope channels. It was hypothesized that the passage of instruments and brushes through endoscope channels during procedures and cleaning contributes to channel damage, bacterial attachment and biofilm formation.

AIM

To compare surface roughness and bacterial attachment in used and new endoscope channels in vivo and in vitro.

METHODS

Surface roughness of 10 clinically used (retired) and seven new colonoscope biopsy channels was analysed by a surface profiler. For the in-vitro study, a flexible endoscope biopsy forceps was passed repeatedly through a curved 3.0-mm-diameter Teflon tube 100, 200 and 500 times. Atomic force microscopy was used to determine the degree of inner surface damage. The number of Escherichia coli or Enterococcus faecium attached to the inner surface of the new Teflon tube and the tube with 500 forceps passes in 1 h at 37^oC was determined by culture.

RESULTS

The average surface roughness of the used biopsy channels was found to be 1.5 times greater than that of the new biopsy channels (P=0.03). Surface roughness of Teflon tubes with 100, 200 and 500 forceps passes was 1.05-, 1.12- and 3.2-fold (P=0.025) greater than the roughness of the new Teflon tubes, respectively. The number of E. coli and E. faecium attached to Teflon tubes with 500 forceps passes was 2.9-fold (P=0.021) and 4.3-fold (P=0.004) higher compared with the number of E. coli and E. faecium attached to the new Teflon tubes, respectively.

CONCLUSION

An association was found between endoscope usage with damage to the biopsy channel and increased bacterial attachment.

Challenges in achieving effective high-level disinfection in endoscope reprocessing

Endoscope reprocessing is often ineffective, and microbes frequently remain on endoscopes after the use of high-level disinfectants (HLDs). Several factors impact reprocessing effectiveness, including non-adherence to guidelines, use of damaged endoscopes, use of insoluble products during endoscopy, insufficient cleaning, contaminated rinse water, and inadequate drying before storage. Our team suspected that issues with HLD chemistries and monitoring could also contribute to reprocessing failures. We conducted a mixed-methods analysis of published literature, our interviews with frontline personnel, and evidence from our previous studies. The evidence showed that reusable HLDs commonly failed tests for minimum effective concentration (MEC) before their maximum usage periods. MEC tests also detected failures associated with single-use HLDs that did not fully deploy. These failures were due to product issues, process complexities, and personnel non-adherence with guidelines and manufacturer instructions. HLDs will likely continue to be used for the foreseeable future. More research is needed to assess real-world practice patterns related to the high-level disinfection step and MEC testing and to establish more realistic usage periods for reusable HLD chemistries. Manufacturers and researchers should evaluate the ability of technological solutions and engineered safeguards to overcome human error. Recognition of the need for quality improvement is growing, and infection preventionists should take action to build on this momentum and collaborate with manufacturers, endoscopists, and reprocessing personnel to improve the effectiveness of high-level disinfection.

Duodenoscope-associated infections: a review

Flexible digestive endoscopes are used for the management of various conditions with hundreds of thousands of therapeutic procedures performed worldwide each year. Duodenoscopes are indispensable tools for the delivery of minimally invasive vital care of numerous pancreaticobiliary disorders. Despite the fact that nosocomial infections after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have always been among the most frequently cited postprocedural complications, recent emergence of duodenoscope-transmitted multiple drug-resistant bacterial infections has led to intense research and debate yet with no clearly delineated solution. Duodenoscope-transmitted nosocomial infections have become one of the most visible topics in the recent literature. Hundreds of high-impact articles have therefore been published in the last decade. This review article discusses how such infections were seen in the past and what is the current situation in both research and practice and thus tries to solve some of the unanswered questions for the future. With the persistence of nosocomial infections despite strict adherence to both manufacturer-issued reprocessing protocols and international guidelines and regulations, an urgent and proper microbiologically driven common action is needed for controlling such nosocomial worldwide threat.

Using Microbiological Sampling to Evaluate the Efficacy of Nasofibroscope Disinfection: The Tristel Trio Wipes System in Ear-Nose-Throat (ENT) Endoscopy

Disinfection and sterilization are needed for guaranteeing that medical and surgical instruments do not spread contagious microorganisms to patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a simple manual technique of high-level disinfection (HLD) of flexible fiberoptic nasofibroscopes (FFNs) with wipes impregnated with a chlorine dioxide solution (Tristel Trio Wipes System—TTW) against a conventional automated washer machine (Soluscope ENT, Cimrex 12—AW). FFNs used in 62 patients undergoing endoscopy at an ENT clinic were sampled according to an aseptic procedure. For each nasoendoscopy, microbiological samples were taken at two times: (1) after a patient’s nasoendoscopy and (2) immediately after high-level disinfection. Ten microliters of each prepared sample were inoculated onto specific culture media for the detection of nasopharyngeal flora microorganisms. The microbiological results obtained from 62 post-disinfection samples revealed bacterial growth on two FFNs disinfected with AW, and five FFNs disinfected with TTW, but this difference is not statistically significant. None of the isolates were pathogenic bacteria. Our results are different than the results obtained by two previously published studies on the TTW system. In both studies, sampling was carried out by swabbing the tip and the handle surface of FFNs. This sampling method was the least effective method means of detecting bacteria on a surface. It can be concluded that the two disinfection systems allow providers to obtain a reduction of the saprophytic and pathogenic microbial load.

Independent root-cause analysis of contributing factors, including dismantling of 2 duodenoscopes, to investigate an outbreak of multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Worldwide, an increasing number of duodenoscope-associated outbreaks are reported. The high prevalence rate of contaminated duodenoscopes puts patients undergoing ERCP at risk of exogenous transmission of microorganisms. The contributing factors of the duodenoscope design to contamination are not well understood. This article reports on the investigation after the outbreak of a multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (MRKP) related to 2 Olympus TJF-Q180V duodenoscopes.

METHODS

We conducted a contact patient screening and microbiologic laboratory database search. Reprocessing procedures were audited, and both duodenoscopes were fully dismantled to evaluate all potential contamination factors. Outcomes were reviewed by an experienced independent expert.

RESULTS

In total, 102 patients who had undergone an ERCP procedure from January to August 2015 were invited for screening. Cultures were available of 81 patients, yielding 27 MRKP-infected or -colonized patients. Ten patients developed an MRKP-related active infection. The 2 duodenoscopes had attack rates (the number of infected or colonized cases/number of exposed persons) of 35% (17/49) and 29% (7/24), respectively. Identical MRKP isolates were cultured from channel flushes of both duodenoscopes. The review revealed 4 major abnormalities: miscommunication about reprocessing, undetected damaged parts, inadequate repair of duodenoscope damage, and duodenoscope design abnormalities, including the forceps elevator, elevator lever, and instrumentation port sealing.

CONCLUSIONS

Outbreaks are associated with a combination of factors, including duodenoscope design issues, repair issues, improper cleaning, and systemic monitoring of contamination. To eliminate future duodenoscope-associated infections, a multipronged approach is required, including clear communication by all parties involved, a reliable servicing market, stringent surveillance measures, and eventually new duodenoscope designs and reprocessing procedures with a larger margin of safety.

Safely reprocessing duodenoscopes: current evidence and future directions

Highly publicised outbreaks of various infections related to the use of duodenoscopes have increased public awareness of the once arcane and largely ignored subject of endoscope reprocessing. Since 2015, national professional societies, multiple federal agencies, and even the US Senate have written reports and guidelines on duodenoscope reprocessing. However, their recommendations are sometimes contradictory and difficult to implement, and new research on the topic is published regularly which further complicates the situation. With this flood of new and sometimes contradictory information, clinicians can feel confused about how to assure the safety of their patients undergoing duodenosocopy. This Review summarises the most salient current research on duodenoscope-associated outbreaks and reprocessing, and aims to provide clinicians with practical information applicable to their practice.

Use of adenosine triphosphate to audit reprocessing of flexible endoscopes with an elevator mechanism

BACKGROUND

There have been reported outbreaks of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections linked to endoscopes with elevator mechanisms. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) testing has been used as a marker for bioburden and monitoring manual cleaning for flexible endoscopes with and without an elevator mechanism. The objective of this study was to determine whether routine ATP testing could identify areas of improvement in cleaning of endoscopes with an elevator mechanism.

METHODS

ATP testing after manual cleaning of TJF-Q180V duodenoscopes and GF-UCT180 linear echoendoscopes (Olympus America Inc, Center Valley, PA) was implemented. Samples were tested from the distal end, the elevator mechanism, and water flushed through the lumen of the biopsy channel. Data were recorded and compared by time point, test point, and reprocessing technician.

RESULTS

Overall failure rate was 6.99% (295 out of 4,219). The highest percentage of failed ATP tests (17.05%) was reported in the first quarter of routine testing, with an overall decrease in rates over time. The elevator mechanism and working channel lumen had higher failure rates than the distal end. Quality of manual cleaning between reprocessing technicians showed variation.

CONCLUSION

ATP testing is effective in identifying residual organic material and improving quality of manual cleaning of endoscopes with an elevator mechanism. Cleaning efficacy is influenced by reprocessing technicians and location tested on the endoscope. Close attention to the working channel and elevator mechanism during manual cleaning is warranted.

An update on gastrointestinal endoscopy-associated infections and their contributing factors

INTRODUCTION

During clinical use, gastrointestinal endoscopes are grossly contaminated with patient's native flora. These endoscopes undergo reprocessing to prevent infectious transmission upon future use. Endoscopy-associated infections and outbreaks have been reported, with a recent focus on the transmission of multi-drug resistant organisms. This review aims to provide an update on endoscopy-associated infections, and the factors contributing to their occurrence.

METHODS

PubMed, ScienceDirect, and CINAHL were searched for articles describing gastrointestinal endoscopy-associated infections and outbreaks published from 2008 to 2018. Factors contributing to their occurrence, and the outcomes of each outbreak were also examined.

RESULTS

This review found 18 articles, 16 of which described duodenoscope-associated infections, and the remaining two described colonoscope- and gastroscope-associated infection respectively. Outbreaks were reported from the United States, France, China, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The causative organisms reported were Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli and Salmonella enteritidis.

CONCLUSIONS

A number of factors, including lapses in reprocessing, biofilm formation, endoscope design issues and endoscope damage, contribute to gastrointestinal endoscopy associated infection. Methods of improving endoscope reprocessing, screening for contamination and evaluating endoscope damage may be vital to preventing future infections and outbreaks.

Microbiologic assessment of flexible gastrointestinal endoscope reprocessing using a pump-assisted sampling technique: an investigation involving all endoscopy units in Tianjin, China

BACKGROUND

Microbiologic surveillance of flexible gastrointestinal endoscopes is recommended in several guidelines as the primary means of identifying reprocessing failures. This study aimed to evaluate the contamination level and prevalence of bacteria of post-reprocessing endoscopes and to access whether using a pump-assisted sampling method (PASM) improves the sensitivity of culture.

METHODS

All 59 endoscopy units in Tianjin, China, were investigated. The PASM and the conventional flushing sampling method (CFSM) were used to compare the results of the microbial culture. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the influencing factors.

RESULTS

One hundred four (56.52%) flushing channel samples of gastrointestinal endoscopes were positive for culture, and the maximum bacterial concentration was 14,100 colony-forming units (CFU)/channel. One hundred fifty-one (82.07%) flushing samples were qualified according to the national standard of China (≤ 20 CFU/channel). The qualified rate of the samples collected by PASM was significantly lower than the qualified rate by CFSM (65.52% vs 89.68%). Using PASM (odds ratio [OR]: 4.257; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.870-9.690) would increase the sensitivity of culture. The use of purified water (OR: 0.288; 95% CI: 0.102-0.814) could reduce the risk of endoscope reprocessing failure.

CONCLUSION

Many endoscopes fail to meet the national standard for microbial culture after reprocessing. Our results suggest that using a pump-assisted method could increase the sensitivity of the test.