1
|
Casini B, Spagnolo AM, Sartini M, Tuvo B, Scarpaci M, Barchitta M, Pan A, Agodi A, Cristina ML, Castiglia P, De Giusti M, Distefano M, Longhitano A, Laganà P, Mentore B, Canale F, Mantero F, Opezzi M, Marciano E, Zurlo L, Segata A, Torre I, Vay D, Vecchi E, Vincenti S. Microbiological surveillance post-reprocessing of flexible endoscopes used in digestive endoscopy: a national study. J Hosp Infect 2023; 131:139-147. [PMID: 36244520 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2022.09.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2022] [Revised: 08/17/2022] [Accepted: 09/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Microbiological surveillance of endoscopes is a safety measure for verifying the quality of reprocessing procedures and identifying contaminated devices, but duodenoscope-related outbreaks are still reported. AIM To assess the effectiveness of duodenoscope reprocessing procedures in Italy. METHODS Between December 2019 and April 2020, data obtained from microbiological surveillance post-reprocessing in 15 Italian endoscopy units were collected. Sampling was carried out after reprocessing or during storage in a cabinet. In keeping with international guidelines and the Italian position paper, the micro-organisms were classified as high-concern organisms (HCOs) and low-concern organisms (LCOs). FINDINGS In total, 144 samples were collected from 51 duodenoscopes. Of these, 36.81% were contaminated: 22.92% were contaminated with HCOs and 13.89% were contaminated with LCOs [2.08% with an LCO load of 11-100 colony-forming units (CFU)/device and 0.69% with an LCO load of >100 CFU/device]. The contamination rate was 27.5% in samples collected after reprocessing, 40% in samples collected during storage in a cabinet that was compliant with EN 16442:2015 (C-I), and 100% in samples collected during storage in a cabinet that was not compliant with EN 16442:2015 (NC-I). The respective HCO rates were 15.00%, 27.27% and 66.67%. Correlation between LCO contamination and storage time was demonstrated (Spearman's rho=0.3701; P=0.0026). The Olympus duodenoscope TJFQ180V demonstrated the lowest rate of contamination (29.82%), although the contamination rate was 100% for duodenoscopes stored in an NC-I cabinet. CONCLUSION Microbiological surveillance, along with strict adherence to reprocessing protocols, may help to detect endoscope contamination at an early stage, and reduce the risk of duodenoscope-associated infections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Casini
- Department of Translational Research, New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - A M Spagnolo
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Genova, Genova, Italy; Operating Unit Hospital Hygiene, Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy.
| | - M Sartini
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Genova, Genova, Italy; Operating Unit Hospital Hygiene, Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy.
| | - B Tuvo
- Department of Translational Research, New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - M Scarpaci
- Department of Translational Research, New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - M Barchitta
- Department of Medical, Surgical and Advanced Technology Sciences "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, Catania, Italy
| | - A Pan
- Operating Unit of Infectious Diseases, ASST Cremona, Cremona, Italy
| | - A Agodi
- Department of Medical, Surgical and Advanced Technology Sciences "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, Catania, Italy
| | - M L Cristina
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Genova, Genova, Italy; Operating Unit Hospital Hygiene, Galliera Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Tuvo B, Scarpaci M, Cosci T, Ribechini A, Briani S, Luchini G, Totaro M, Baggiani A, Cristina ML, Barnini S, Leonetti S, Casini B. Adoption of Improved Reprocessing Decreased Microbiological Non-Compliance for Bronchoscopes. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:13978. [PMID: 36360859 PMCID: PMC9656596 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192113978] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2022] [Revised: 10/12/2022] [Accepted: 10/24/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the past few decades, the inadequate reprocessing of bronchoscopes has been associated with several serious outbreaks caused by multidrug-resistant microorganisms. In this study we evaluated the improvement in the quality of reprocessing in a Bronchoscopy Unit (BU), after the introduction of a new procedure. METHODS In 2019, observational and clinical audits were conducted in the BU. After the introduction of an improved procedure in 2020, a microbiological surveillance plan was implemented in 2021. RESULTS In 2019, 13 of 22 bronchoscopes (59%) resulted as non-compliant, 18% as high concern organisms (HCO) and 36.4% as high microbial count (≥100 CFU/all channels) and HCO. The most frequent microorganisms were Staphylococcus aureus (38.5%) and NDM-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (15.4%). The bronchoscopes were stored inside their transport cases, which in some cases were found to be contaminated by the same strains isolated on the bronchoscopes (Enterobacter gergoviae and Vibrio alginolyticus). In 2021, all 31 bronchoscopes were sampled at least three times and 13/99 (13.1%) resulted as non-compliant, mostly K. pneumoniae (4.04%). Contamination level increases weakly in bronchoscopes in use for more than 14 years (R = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS The adoption of an improved reprocessing procedure decreased the non-compliance of bronchoscopes, increasing the quality of the process and patient safety.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benedetta Tuvo
- Department of Translational Research and the New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Michela Scarpaci
- Department of Translational Research and the New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Tommaso Cosci
- Department of Translational Research and the New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | | | - Silvia Briani
- Hospital Management, University Hospital of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Grazia Luchini
- Hospital Management, University Hospital of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Michele Totaro
- Department of Translational Research and the New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Angelo Baggiani
- Department of Translational Research and the New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Maria Luisa Cristina
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Genova, Via Pastore 1, 16132 Genova, Italy
| | - Simona Barnini
- Microbiology Unit, University Hospital of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Simone Leonetti
- Department of Life Science, School of Advanced Studies Sant’Anna, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Beatrice Casini
- Department of Translational Research and the New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Scarpaci M, Cosci T, Tuvo B, Guarini A, Iannone T, Zullo A, Casini B. Good Practices on Endoscope Reprocessing in Italy: Findings of a Nationwide Survey. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:12082. [PMID: 36231398 PMCID: PMC9566799 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912082] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2022] [Revised: 09/19/2022] [Accepted: 09/21/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Background: Correct reprocessing and microbiological surveillance on endoscopes are fundamental for preventing the transmission of multi-drug resistant strains and device-related infections. Methods: A questionnaire with three domains was created: (1) centre characteristics; (2) endoscope reprocessing procedures; and (3) application of microbiological surveillance. Nurses working in endoscopic units across Italy were invited to anonymously fill out the questionnaire on the SurveyMonkey platform between November 2021 and February 2022. Results: A total of 82 out of 132 endoscopic centres participated in the survey, with at least one centre from each Italian region. Data found different concerns regarding the current practice of both reprocessing and microbiological surveillance. According to respondents, the training on reprocessing was performed through theoretical training and only in 10% of centres; the microbiological surveillance was regularly performed in 59% of centres; and sampled endoscopes were not excluded for use in 31% of centres performing the surveillance until the outcome was pending, and when positive, 72% maintained them in quarantine until a successive negative result. Conclusions: Reprocessing and microbiological surveillance currently present several criticisms along the endoscopic centres in Italy. Our survey highlights the need for the correct application of the national recommendations in each endoscopic centre to prevent the potential transmission of endoscope-related infections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michela Scarpaci
- Department of Translational Research, N.T.M.C. University of Pisa, Via S. Zeno 35-37, 56127 Pisa, Italy
| | - Tommaso Cosci
- Department of Translational Research, N.T.M.C. University of Pisa, Via S. Zeno 35-37, 56127 Pisa, Italy
| | - Benedetta Tuvo
- Department of Translational Research, N.T.M.C. University of Pisa, Via S. Zeno 35-37, 56127 Pisa, Italy
| | - Alessandra Guarini
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy, ‘Nuovo Regina Margherita’ Hospital, 00153 Rome, Italy
| | - Teresa Iannone
- Gastroenterology Unit, ‘Polistena’ Hospital, 89024 Reggio Calabria, Italy
| | - Angelo Zullo
- Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy, ‘Nuovo Regina Margherita’ Hospital, 00153 Rome, Italy
| | - Beatrice Casini
- Department of Translational Research, N.T.M.C. University of Pisa, Via S. Zeno 35-37, 56127 Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rodríguez de Santiago E, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Pohl H, Agrawal D, Arvanitakis M, Baddeley R, Bak E, Bhandari P, Bretthauer M, Burga P, Donnelly L, Eickhoff A, Hayee B, Kaminski MF, Karlović K, Lorenzo-Zúñiga V, Pellisé M, Pioche M, Siau K, Siersema PD, Stableforth W, Tham TC, Triantafyllou K, Tringali A, Veitch A, Voiosu AM, Webster GJ, Vienne A, Beilenhoff U, Bisschops R, Hassan C, Gralnek IM, Messmann H. Reducing the environmental footprint of gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2022; 54:797-826. [PMID: 35803275 DOI: 10.1055/a-1859-3726] [Citation(s) in RCA: 75] [Impact Index Per Article: 37.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Climate change and the destruction of ecosystems by human activities are among the greatest challenges of the 21st century and require urgent action. Health care activities significantly contribute to the emission of greenhouse gases and waste production, with gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy being one of the largest contributors. This Position Statement aims to raise awareness of the ecological footprint of GI endoscopy and provides guidance to reduce its environmental impact. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) outline suggestions and recommendations for health care providers, patients, governments, and industry. MAIN STATEMENTS 1: GI endoscopy is a resource-intensive activity with a significant yet poorly assessed environmental impact. 2: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adopting immediate actions to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 3: ESGE-ESGENA recommend adherence to guidelines and implementation of audit strategies on the appropriateness of GI endoscopy to avoid the environmental impact of unnecessary procedures. 4: ESGE-ESGENA recommend the embedding of reduce, reuse, and recycle programs in the GI endoscopy unit. 5: ESGE-ESGENA suggest that there is an urgent need to reassess and reduce the environmental and economic impact of single-use GI endoscopic devices. 6: ESGE-ESGENA suggest against routine use of single-use GI endoscopes. However, their use could be considered in highly selected patients on a case-by-case basis. 7: ESGE-ESGENA recommend inclusion of sustainability in the training curricula of GI endoscopy and as a quality domain. 8: ESGE-ESGENA recommend conducting high quality research to quantify and minimize the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. 9: ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy companies assess, disclose, and audit the environmental impact of their value chain. 10: ESGE-ESGENA recommend that GI endoscopy should become a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions practice by 2050.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enrique Rodríguez de Santiago
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Universidad de Alcalá, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - Mario Dinis-Ribeiro
- Porto Comprehensive Cancer Center (Porto.CCC), and RISE@CI-IPOP (Health Research Network), Porto, Portugal
| | - Heiko Pohl
- Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, New Hampshire, and Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, VA White River Junction, Vermont, USA
| | - Deepak Agrawal
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Dell Medical School, University of Texas Austin, Texas, USA
| | - Marianna Arvanitakis
- Department of Gastroenterology, Erasme University Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Robin Baddeley
- King's Health Partners Institute for Therapeutic Endoscopy, King's College Hospital, and Wolfson Unit for Endoscopy, St Mark's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Elzbieta Bak
- Department of Gastroenterology and Internal Medicine, Clinical Hospital of Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | | | - Michael Bretthauer
- Clinical Effectiveness Research Group, University of Oslo, and Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Patricia Burga
- Endoscopy Department, University Hospital of Padua, Italy
| | - Leigh Donnelly
- Endoscopy Department, Northumbria Healthcare NHS Trust, Northumberland, United Kingdom
| | - Axel Eickhoff
- Klinik für Gastroenterologie, Diabetologie, Infektiologie, Klinikum Hanau, Hanau, Germany
| | - Bu'Hussain Hayee
- Department of Gastroenterology, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom
| | - Michal F Kaminski
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Department of Oncological Gastroenterology, The Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Katarina Karlović
- Clinical Hospital Center Rijeka , Department of Gastroenterology, Endoscopy Unit, Rijeka, Croatia
| | - Vicente Lorenzo-Zúñiga
- Department of Gastroenterology, University and Polytechnic La Fe Hospital/IIS La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Maria Pellisé
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), and Institut d'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Mathieu Pioche
- Endoscopy Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France
| | - Keith Siau
- Department of Gastroenterology, Dudley Group Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, United Kingdom
| | - Peter D Siersema
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - William Stableforth
- Department of Gastroenterology, Dudley Group Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, United Kingdom
| | - Tony C Tham
- Division of Gastroenterology, Ulster Hospital, Dundonald, Belfast, Northern Ireland
| | - Konstantinos Triantafyllou
- Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Internal Medicine - Propaedeutic, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Attikon University General Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Alberto Tringali
- Digestive Endoscopy Unit, ULSS 2 Marca Trevigiana, Conegliano Hospital, Conegliano, Italy
| | - Andrew Veitch
- Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom
| | - Andrei M Voiosu
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Colentina Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | - George J Webster
- Department of Gastroenterology, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Raf Bisschops
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Catholic University of Leuven (KUL), TARGID, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Cesare Hassan
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, and Endoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Ian M Gralnek
- Ellen and Pinchas Mamber Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Emek Medical Center, Afula, and Rappaport Faculty of Medicine Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Helmut Messmann
- III Medizinische Klinik Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|