Technologies for monitoring the quality of endoscope reprocessing

Assessment of Ultraviolet-C Light for Sterilization of Hysteroscopy Instruments

Objective To evaluate the sterilization efficacy of hysteroscopy instruments using ultraviolet C (UV-C) light at a wavelength of 259 nm in the Endoscopic Diagnostic Center of the National Institute of Perinatology. Methods Consecutive patients undergoing office hysteroscopy via the Bettochi vaginoscopy technique were included, excluding those with conditions such as viable intrauterine pregnancy or acute pelvic infection. Samples were collected from six designated sites of the hysteroscope, including the inner sheath, internal holes of the inner sheath, lens, graspers, scissors, and outer sheath. Initially, samples were taken after the first sterilization using a LAOKEN LK/MJG-150 Plasma Sterilizer (Chengdu, China). Next, samples were collected after the routine use of the hysteroscope in the office setting to confirm contamination. Subsequently, a new set of samples were taken after a 20-minute UV-C sterilization cycle with the EsteriUV device. Results The initial sterilization achieved a 96.73% sterilization rate, with ten samples testing positive for Staphylococcus coagulase-negative. Post-hysteroscopy, contamination increased significantly. Afterward, UV-C sterilization achieved a 96.08% sterilization rate, with 11 samples positive for Staphylococcus coagulase-negative and one for Streptococcus anginosus (p=0.66). No clinical infections were reported in any patient within one-month post-procedure. Conclusion UV-C light is a viable alternative for hysteroscopy instrument sterilization, demonstrating comparable efficacy to conventional methods. Further studies are recommended to optimize UV-C parameters for enhanced sterilization efficiency.

Efficacy of a novel channel-cleaning ball brush for endoscope reprocessing: a randomized controlled trial

Background/Aims

Endoscopic channels are difficult to clean and can cause infection transmission. We examined the effectiveness of a newly developed channel-cleaning ball brush (BB), which is sucked into the endoscopic channel and scrapes and cleans the lumen as it passes through.

Methods

The upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopes used for patient examinations were randomly selected as the conventional brush (CB) or BB group. After manual cleaning, the presence or absence of carbohydrates, proteins, adenosine triphosphate, and hemoglobin was assessed.

Results

Fifty-six and 58 endoscopes were cleaned with the CB and BB, respectively. Carbohydrate and protein were detected in one (1.8%) and two endoscopes (3.4%) in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=1.000). Hemoglobin was observed in one (1.8%) and three endoscopes (5.2%) in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=0.636). The adenosine triphosphate levels were 10.6±15.9 and 12.5±14.3 relative light units in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=0.496). Twenty-seven (48.2%) and 19 (32.8%) endoscopes were positive for microbial cultures in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=0.136).

Conclusions

The efficacy of BB was not significantly different from that of CB in the endoscopic channel-cleaning process.

Novel Algorithms for Reprocessing, Drying and Storing Endoscopes

After outbreaks of duodenoscope-transmitted infection with multidrug-resistant organisms, it has become clear that institutions must optimize their endoscope reprocessing programs. Standard endoscope reprocessing practices may not represent the ideal approach for preventing transmission of infection related to endoscopy. We discuss multiple approaches to enhance and optimize reprocessing, drying, and storage of standard duodenoscopes. The optimal enhanced duodenoscope reprocessing modality remains to be determined. Acknowledging the challenges and limitations in effectively reprocessing duodenoscopes, the FDA issued a safety communiqué recommending transitioning to either single use disposable duodenoscopes or duodenoscopes with innovative designs that allow more effective reprocessing.

Enzymatic detergent reuse in gastroscope processing: a potential source of microorganism transmission

OBJECTIVE

to evaluate the potential contamination of enzymatic detergent from its reuse and to identify the microbiological profile in the solution used to clean gastrointestinal endoscopic devices.

METHOD

cross-sectional study based on microbiological analysis of 76 aliquots of 19 different enzymatic detergent solutions used to clean endoscopic devices. The aliquots were homogenized, subjected to Millipore® 0.45 µm membrane filtration and the presumptive identification of microorganisms was performed by biochemical-physiological methods according to previously established specific bacterial groups that are of clinical and epidemiological relevance.

RESULTS

the mean values, as well as the standard deviation and the median, of the enzymatic detergent microbial load increased as the solution was reused. There was a significant difference between the means of after first use and after fifth reuse. A total of 97 microorganisms were identified, with predominance of the coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas spp., Klebsiella spp., Enterobacter spp. genus, and Escherichia coli species.

CONCLUSION

the reuse of the enzymatic detergent solution is a risk to the safe processing of endoscopic devices, evidenced by its contamination with pathogenic potential microorganisms, since the enzymatic detergent has no bactericidal property and can contribute as an important source for outbreaks in patients under such procedures.

Use of ethylene-oxide gas sterilisation to terminate multidrug-resistant bacterial outbreaks linked to duodenoscopes

Background

Cleaning and high-level disinfection have been the standard in the USA and other countries for reprocessing flexible endoscopes, including duodenoscopes and other types of gastrointestinal endoscopes. For decades, this practice has been a cornerstone for infection prevention in the endoscopic setting. However, amid recent reports associating the use of duodenoscopes with infections and outbreaks of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) and related multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), reasonable questions about the adequacy of current practices for reprocessing duodenoscopes have emerged.

Objectives

To review and evaluate the adequacy of current reprocessing practices for preventing duodenoscopes from transmitting CRE and related MDROs.

Methods

The MEDLINE/PubMed database was searched to identify published cases associating confirmed (or suspected) infections of CRE or a related MDRO with exposure to a duodenoscope since 2012, when duodenoscopes became a recognised risk factor for the transmission of CRE. The Internet was also searched to identify news articles and other reports documenting eligible cases occurring during this same timeframe but not identified during the MEDLINE database’s search. The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) medical device database was queried to identify regulatory reports describing these same types of cases, also recorded since 2012. The clinical and reprocessing details of each eligible case were reviewed to identify (when possible): (a) the reprocessing method (eg, high-level disinfection) performed at the time of the infections, (b) whether the facility’s compliance with the manufacturer’s reprocessing instructions was confirmed, and (c) the measure(s) or corrective action(s) the facility implemented to prevent additional multidrug-resistant infections.

Results

Seventeen cases in the USA and six in other countries (primarily Europe) associating infections (and colonizations) of CRE or a related MDRO with exposure to a duodenoscope were reviewed. Fourteen of these 23 outbreaks were caused by CRE, and six by a related MDRO. Two of these six latter cases identified Klebsiella pneumoniae carrying the mcr-1 gene as the pathogen. For 12 of these 23 cases, it was reported or implied that the duodenoscope was being high-level disinfected at the time of the infections, consistent with published guidelines. For the remaining 11 cases, the associated report(s) did not clearly identify how the duodenoscope was being reprocessed at the time of the infections (although it may be reasonably concluded that at least some, if not all, of these 11 cases involved high-level disinfection).

Further, eight of the 23 cases reported the duodenoscope was being reprocessed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions for use (and professional guidelines) at the time of the infections. Seven of the cases discussed the design of the duodenoscope (eg, the forceps elevator mechanism) in the context of reprocessing and the infections. Three of the cases identified one or more reprocessing lapses, including inadequate cleaning, delayed reprocessing and improper drying and/or storage of the duodenoscope. Most of these 23 cases were associated with exposure to a duodenoscope model featuring a sealed elevator-wire channel. Six of the cases reported adopting (or in one case supplementing high-level disinfection with) ethylene oxide (EO) gas sterilisation of the duodenoscope, with at least three reporting this measure terminated the outbreak. Other measures adopted to prevent additional infections included removing the implicated duodenoscope from use, re-training staff about proper cleaning, microbiological culturing of the duodenoscope and returning the duodenoscope to the manufacturer for evaluation, maintenance and/or repair.

Conclusions

This study's findings suggest current reprocessing practices may not always be sufficiently effective to prevent a duodenoscope from transmitting CRE and related MDROs, at least in some circumstances including an outbreak setting. Factors this review identified that may contribute to the device remaining contaminated after reprocessing include the device’s design; breaches of recommended reprocessing guidelines (eg, inadequate manual cleaning, delayed reprocessing or improper device storage); damage to the device; lacking servicing, maintenance or repair; and/or the presence of biofilms. Measures that can mitigate the impact of these and other reprocessing challenges and reduce, if not eliminate, the risk of transmission of CRE or a related MDRO by a duodenoscope include the use of EO gas sterilization (or another comparably effective process or method). In 2015, the FDA suggested healthcare facilities consider performing at least one of four supplemental measures, which include EO gas sterilisation, to improve the effectiveness of duodenoscope reprocessing. Whether the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention might reclassify duodenoscopes as critical devices requiring sterilisation is currently unresolved.

Duodenoscope-Associated Infections: Update on an Emerging Problem

The duodenoscope is among the most complex medical instruments that undergo disinfection between patients. Transmission of infection by contaminated scopes has remained a challenge since its inception. Notable risk factors for pathogen transmission include non-adherence to disinfection guidelines, encouragement of biofilm deposition due to complex design and surface defects and contaminated automated endoscope reprocessors. The most common infections following endoscopy are endogenous infections involving the patient's own gut flora. Exogenous infections, on the other hand, are associated with contaminated scopes and can theoretically be prevented by effective reprocessing. Pseudomonas aeruginosa is currently the most common organism isolated from contaminated endoscopes. Of note, reports of multidrug-resistant duodenoscopy-associated outbreaks have surfaced recently, many of which occurred despite adequate reprocessing. The FDA and CDC currently recommend comprehensive cleaning followed with at least high-level disinfection for reprocessing of flexible GI endoscopes. Reports of duodenoscope-related outbreaks despite compliance with established guidelines have prompted professional and government bodies to revisit existing guidelines and offer supplementary recommendations for duodenoscope processing. For the purposes of this review, we identified reports of duodenoscope-associated infections from 2000 till date. For each outbreak, we noted the organisms isolated, the number of cases reported, any possible explanations of contamination, and the measures undertaken to end each outbreak. We have also attempted to present an overview of recent developments in this rapidly evolving field.

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

Background and study aims  Prevention of infection transmission from contaminated endoscopes would benefit from a rapid test that could detect low levels of viable bacteria after high level disinfection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the rapid NOW! (RN) test's ability to detect endoscope contamination. Materials and methods  The RN test kit and the accompanying fluorometer were evaluated. The manufacturer states that a fluorometer signal > 300 units is indicative of viable Gram-negative bacteria. Suspension testing of varying concentrations of Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis were used to determine the RN test limit of detection. Simulated-use testing was done using a duodenoscope inoculated with 10 % blood containing approximately 35 CFU E. coli per channel. Samples were extracted from the duodenoscope instrument channel and tested using the manufacturer's instructions. Results  The RN test could consistently detect 10 CFU of E. coli and P. aeruginosa (fluorescent signal of 9,000 to 11,000 units) but not E. faecalis. Sensitivity and specificity for Gram-negative bacteria were 93 % and 90 %, respectively, using all of the suspensions in the study. Extraction of E. coli from an inoculated duodenoscope instrument channel repeatedly provided a positive signal (i. e. > 2,000 units). Conclusions  The RN test can reliably detect low levels of Gram-negative bacteria in suspension as well as from samples extracted from endoscope channels. These preliminary findings are encouraging but further assessment of extraction efficacy, impact of organic residuals and clinical workflow are still needed.

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.

Evaluation of adenosine triphosphate test for cleaning assessment of gastroscopes and the effect on workload in a busy endoscopy center

OBJECTIVE

Using adenosine triphosphate (ATP) tests to assess manual cleaning of gastroscopes and to determine the associated workload in a busy endoscopy unit.

METHODS

Patient-used gastroscopes were sampled before and after cleaning to assess ATP levels, bioburden, and protein. Samples were collected by flushing 20 mL of sterile water through the biopsy port to the distal end. Time spent for reprocessing and performing the ATP test was recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-four samples were collected from 10 gastroscopes. After manual cleaning, 14/24 (58.3%) samples had no microbial growth (mean, 21 colony-forming units/cm²), and in 22/24 (91.7%) samples the protein was undetectable (mean, 0.04 µg/cm²). ATP test was above the cutoff (200 relative light units [RLU]) in 17/24 (70.8%) samples (mean, 498 RLU). After the second cleaning, 11/17 (64.7%) gastroscopes still failed the ATP test (mean, 321.2 RLU). The mean time spent to perform manual cleaning and ATP tests was 16 and 8 minutes, respectively. Hence, each test increased the length of time for cleaning plus testing cleanliness by 50%.

CONCLUSION

Further studies regarding the optimal cutoff for ATP tests are needed. ATP tests for cleaning monitoring are easy to perform and provide immediate feedback to the team. However, the increased workload needs to be considered.

An extraction free modified o-phthalaldehyde assay for quantifying residual protein and microbial biofilms on surfaces

Biological contamination of surfaces in industry and healthcare is an important vector of disease transmission. Current assays for detecting surface-adherent contamination require extraction of biological soil. However, physical inaccessibility or poor solubility may limit recovery. Here, how the o-phthalaldehyde (OPA) protein assay can be modified to measure residual protein (modeled with bovine serum albumin) or biofilm on a surface without extraction is described. The assay limit of detection (LOD) for protein was 1.6 µg cm^-2. The detection threshold for Staphylococcus epidermis biofilm was 117 µg cm^-2. The clinical utility of the method was demonstrated for measurements taken from clinically used endoscopes. Since this method is more sensitive than extraction-based testing, clinical results should not be compared with conventional benchmarks. By enabling direct detection and quantification of soils in complex or hard-to-reach areas, this method has potential to improve the margin of safety in medical and industrial cleaning processes.

Assessment of test methods for evaluating effectiveness of cleaning flexible endoscopes

BACKGROUND

Strict adherence to each step of reprocessing is imperative to removing potentially infectious agents. Multiple methods for verifying proper reprocessing exist; however, each presents challenges and limitations, and best practice within the industry has not been established. Our goal was to evaluate endoscope cleaning verification tests with particular interest in the evaluation of the manual cleaning step. The results of the cleaning verification tests were compared with microbial culturing to see if a positive cleaning verification test would be predictive of microbial growth.

METHODS

This study was conducted at 2 high-volume endoscopy units within a multisite health care system. Each of the 90 endoscopes were tested for adenosine triphosphate, protein, microbial growth via agar plate, and rapid gram-negative culture via assay. The endoscopes were tested in 3 locations: the instrument channel, control knob, and elevator mechanism.

RESULTS

This analysis showed substantial level of agreement between protein detection postmanual cleaning and protein detection post-high-level disinfection at the control head for scopes sampled sequentially.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that if protein is detected postmanual cleaning, there is a significant likelihood that protein will also be detected post-high-level disinfection. It also infers that a cleaning verification test is not predictive of microbial growth.

Microbiological monitoring of medical devices after cleaning, disinfection and sterilisation

The use of reusable semi-critical devices has been extended in current medical practice for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. However, reuse of these instruments carries the risk of cross-transmission of microorganisms from one patient to another. The process of cleaning and disinfecting these devices is complex, long, expensive and very error-prone. This paper analyses the epidemiological aspects of infections associated with the reuse of semi-critical devices and the role of the Microbiology laboratory in monitoring the cleaning and disinfecting process through microbiological controls. The recommendations of different scientific societies on the relevance of such controls are reviewed and specific recommendations are proposed for the taking and processing of the samples, interpretation of the results and measures to be taken depending on the results obtained.

Duodenoscope reprocessing surveillance with adenosine triphosphate testing and terminal cultures: a clinical pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent reports of infectious outbreaks linked to duodenoscopes have led to proposals for duodenoscope surveillance culturing, which has inherent limitations. We aimed to assess the feasibility of real-time adenosine triphosphate (ATP) testing after manual cleaning and its ability to predict reprocessing adequacy, as determined by terminal duodenoscope cultures.

METHODS

Clinically used duodenoscopes underwent reprocessing per current guidelines. After manual cleaning, ATP samples were obtained from the elevator, within the proximal biopsy port, and by flushing of the biopsy channel. After high-level disinfection (HLD), aerobic cultures of the elevator and biopsy channel were obtained using sterile technique. Duodenoscopes with any ATP sample ≥200 relative light units underwent repeated cycles of cleaning, ATP testing, HLD, and terminal culturing.

RESULTS

Twenty clinically used duodenoscopes were included; 18 underwent a second reprocessing cycle, and 6 underwent a third reprocessing cycle because of detection of high ATP. After the initial reprocessing cycle, 12 of 20 (60%) duodenoscopes had positive culture results, most commonly yielding gram-negative bacilli (GNB, n = 11 from 9 duodenoscopes), and catalase-positive gram-positive cocci (CP-GPC, n = 7 from 7 duodenoscopes), suggesting staphylococcal organisms. Ambient environmental controls also showed GNB and CP-GPC growth. The overall sensitivity and specificity of ATP testing compared with terminal cultures were 30% and 53%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ATP sampling appears to correlate poorly with terminal culture results and cannot be recommended as a surrogate for terminal cultures. The performance and interpretation of cultures remains complicated by the potential recovery of environmental contaminants.

Surveillance of Endoscopes: Comparison of Different Sampling Techniques

OBJECTIVE To compare different techniques of endoscope sampling to assess residual bacterial contamination. DESIGN Diagnostic study. SETTING The endoscopy unit of an 1,100-bed university hospital performing ~13,000 endoscopic procedures annually. METHODS In total, 4 sampling techniques, combining flushing fluid with or without a commercial endoscope brush, were compared in an endoscope model. Based on these results, sterile physiological saline flushing with or without PULL THRU brush was selected for evaluation on 40 flexible endoscopes by adenosine triphosphate (ATP) measurement and bacterial culture. Acceptance criteria from the French National guideline (<25 colony-forming units [CFU] per endoscope and absence of indicator microorganisms) were used as part of the evaluation. RESULTS On biofilm-coated PTFE tubes, physiological saline in combination with a PULL THRU brush generated higher mean ATP values (2,579 relative light units [RLU]) compared with saline alone (1,436 RLU; P=.047). In the endoscope samples, culture yield using saline plus the PULL THRU (mean, 43 CFU; range, 1-400 CFU) was significantly higher than that of saline alone (mean, 17 CFU; range, 0-500 CFU; P<.001). In samples obtained using the saline+PULL THRU brush method, ATP values of samples classified as unacceptable were significantly higher than those of samples classified as acceptable (P=.001). CONCLUSION Physiological saline flushing combined with PULL THRU brush to sample endoscopes generated higher ATP values and increased the yield of microbial surveillance culture. Consequently, the acceptance rate of endoscopes based on a defined CFU limit was significantly lower when the saline+PULL THRU method was used instead of saline alone. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1062-1069.

Is the Stella™ 5L system an effective cold sterilization technique for needle-based confocal miniprobes?

Background and Objective:

Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) under endoscopic ultrasound guidance is a newly developed imaging technique for pancreatic lesions and lymph nodes, enabling a subcellular level of resolution. The confocal miniprobe is an invasive instrument designed to be reused up to 10 times. Therefore, a method that ensures the complete elimination of microbial contaminants on the device is necessary. We studied the bactericidal efficacy of the Stella™ system, which purports to achieve this objective.

Materials and Methods:

The surfaces of three nCLE miniprobes were contaminated with suspensions of Bacillus atrophaeus (ATCC9372). One probe was randomly selected to count the bacterial load on the surface. The other two probes were manually cleaned and rinsed. One probe was randomly selected to count bacteria on the surface, and the other probe was sterilized using the Stella™ 5L endoscopic sterilization system before obtaining the bacterial count. The process was repeated for 20 cycles to evaluate the microbicidal efficacy of the Stella™ 5L endoscopic sterilization system. These miniprobes were immersed in the Stella Fuse disinfectant for 72 h. After the 72 h of immersion, the weight loss of probes was determined using a high precision electronic scale to examine corrosion following disinfection. The change in image quality was evaluated by an endoscopist.

Results:

From an initial contamination level of 4.48 × 10⁶ ± 1.57 × 10⁶ cfu/mL on the surface of the probes, the bacterial count was reduced to 4.25 × 10² ± 1.95 × 10² cfu/mL after manual cleaning (including enzyme washing), and no microorganisms were recovered after 20 cycles with the Stella™ 5L system. The probe weights before and after 72 h of immersion were 45.769 (45.768–45.771) g and 45.762 (45.752–45.768) g, respectively. No change in image quality was observed.

Conclusion:

This study shows that the Stella™ 5L system is capable of the complete elimination of microorganism contamination in a short period and avoids the toxicity of typical disinfectants. It is a safe, cheap, and efficient sterilization approach that provides a new option for nCLE miniprobe sterilization.

Adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence for bacteriologic surveillance and reprocessing strategies for minimizing risk of infection transmission by duodenoscopes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent outbreaks of duodenoscope-transmitted infections underscore the importance of adequate endoscope reprocessing. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence testing allows rapid evaluation of endoscopes for bacteriologic/biologic residue. In this prospective study we evaluate the utility of ATP in bacteriologic surveillance and the effects of endoscopy staff education and dual cycles of cleaning and high-level disinfection (HLD) on endoscope reprocessing.

METHODS

ATP bioluminescence was measured after precleaning, manual cleaning, and HLD on rinsates from suction-biopsy channels of all endoscopes and elevator channels of duodenoscopes/linear echoendoscopes after use. ATP bioluminescence was remeasured in duodenoscopes (1) after re-education and competency testing of endoscopy staff and subsequently (2) after 2 cycles of precleaning and manual cleaning and single cycle of HLD or (3) after 2 cycles of precleaning, manual cleaning, and HLD.

RESULTS

The ideal ATP bioluminescence benchmark of <200 relative light units (RLUs) after manual cleaning was achieved from suction-biopsy channel rinsates of all endoscopes, but 9 of 10 duodenoscope elevator channel rinsates failed to meet this benchmark. Re-education reduced RLUs in duodenoscope elevator channel rinsates after precleaning (23,218.0 vs 1340.5 RLUs, P < .01) and HLD (177.0 vs 12.0 RLUs, P < .01). After 2 cycles of manual cleaning/HLD, duodenoscope elevator channel RLUs achieved levels similar to sterile water, with corresponding negative cultures.

CONCLUSIONS

ATP testing offers a rapid, inexpensive alternative for detection of endoscope microbial residue. Re-education of endoscopy staff and 2 cycles of cleaning and HLD decreased elevator channel RLUs to levels similar to sterile water and may therefore minimize the risk of transmission of infections by duodenoscopes.

Guideline Implementation: Processing Flexible Endoscopes

The updated AORN "Guideline for processing flexible endoscopes" provides guidance to perioperative, endoscopy, and sterile processing personnel for processing all types of reusable flexible endoscopes and accessories in all procedural settings. This article focuses on key points of the guideline to help perioperative personnel safely and effectively process flexible endoscopes to prevent infection transmission. The key points address verification of manual cleaning, mechanical cleaning and processing, storage in a drying cabinet, determination of maximum storage time before reprocessing is needed, and considerations for implementing a microbiologic surveillance program. Perioperative RNs should review the complete guideline for additional information and for guidance when writing and updating policies and procedures.

Residual contamination and bioburden after reprocessing of single-use endoscopic ultrasound needles: An ex vivo study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) aspiration needles are single-use devices. However, in many centers, because of cost-constraints, these devices are reused multiple times. We studied microbiological contamination and bioburden on reprocessed needles to evaluate whether these devices can be successfully sterilized.

METHODS

We studied 10 EUS needles each of 19 G, 22 G, and 25 G in size, and five 22-G ProCore needles. After initial use, each needle was reprocessed by a standardized protocol. We used standard microbiological cultures, as well as ATP bioluminescence technique to quantify bioburden as relative light units (RLU). We defined significant soil contamination by RLU values >200. We also used extractant fluid to disrupt cell membranes in an attempt to enhance ATP detection.

RESULTS

We found culture positivity in 3/34 (8.8%), and detectable bioburden on the exposed surface of 33/35 (94.3%), and inside lumen of 29 (82.9%) reprocessed FNA needles. Significant bioburden was found in three (8.6%) and two (5.7%) needles on the surface and lumen, respectively. We found that use of extractant fluid enhanced detection of bioburden. Larger (19 G) needles had higher surface contamination (P = 0.016), but there was no relation of luminal contamination with needle diameter (P = 0.138). Sheath design and presence of side bevel did not influence extent of contamination. There was significant correlation between the surface and intraluminal bioburden (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant bioburden in reprocessed EUS needles; standard microbiological cultures have low sensitivity for detection of needle contamination. We have provided objective evidence for the futility of reprocessing attempts, and practice of EUS needle reuse should be discontinued.

Risk of infection transmission in curvilinear array echoendoscopes: results of a prospective reprocessing and culture registry

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The complex design of the elevator mechanism in duodenoscopes has been recognized as a challenge for disinfection and recently implicated as a potential source of persistent bacterial contamination. Curvilinear array (CLA) echoendoscopes also have an elevator mechanism; however, there are no recommendations or data regarding the risk of persistent bacterial contamination of echoendoscopes. Here we hoped to determine the yield of microbial growth with routine bacterial surveillance cultures of reprocessed CLA echoendoscopes.

METHODS

Beginning in February 2015 to February 2016, CLA echoendoscopes at a single tertiary care center underwent prospective bacterial surveillance cultures after reprocessing. Any growth of gram-negative bacilli was considered to be critical. Echoendoscopes with a positive result underwent quarantine followed by repeat disinfection and culture.

RESULTS

During the study period, 540 cultures were obtained; 521 (96.5%) were primary cultures obtained from 18 CLA echoendoscopes. Twenty-two primary cultures (4.2%) were positive for gram-negative bacilli after high-level disinfection reprocessing. Eleven different bacteria were isolated: Klebsiella pneumoniae, Citrobacter freundii, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella oxytoca, Sphingomonas paucimobilis, Acinetobacter baumanii, Enterobacter cloacae, Hafnia alvei, Pseudomonas putida, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Antibiotic sensitivity data on 19 of 24 bacteria (79.2%) isolated from positive primary cultures revealed no documented cases of carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae, cephalosporin-resistant-Klebsiella, or multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter. There have been no documented cases of patient-to-patient transmission.

CONCLUSIONS

After following standard high-level disinfection and reprocessing, CLA echoendoscopes can remain culture positive for high-concern organisms. Recommendations regarding infection risk should take into consideration elevator-containing echoendoscopes in addition to duodenoscopes to ensure patient safety and endoscope reprocessing efficacy.

Multidepartmental Response to a Duodenoscope Used on a CRE Patient: A Case Study

Transmission of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) via duodenoscopes, specialized endoscopes used during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures, has attracted media attention since early 2015. This attention has placed increasing focus on the reprocessing of duodenoscopes. Current reprocessing recommendations for these endoscopes require either high-level disinfection or ethylene oxide sterilization. While reprocessing duodenoscopes, staff at endoscopy locations within the Mercy health system perform a single high-level disinfection cycle that is preceded by two cycles of manual cleaning. The Mercy system has 37 locations for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures and nine that can accommodate patients requiring ERCP. In early 2016, the Mercy Oklahoma City location performed an ERCP on a patient known prior to the case to be a carrier of CRE. After the case, multiple departments located in both the Oklahoma City and St. Louis facilities partnered to culture and sterilize the duodenoscope used in that case to ensure its safety for use on subsequent patients. This case study presents the situation and discusses culturing of endoscopes. In light of the evidence presented, the importance of enhanced communication and cooperation to achieve patient safety should be paramount to all other factors.

Outbreaks of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections associated with duodenoscopes: What can we do to prevent infections?

Recent outbreaks with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) in patients who have undergone endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have raised concerns of whether current endoscope reprocessing guidelines are adequate to ensure a patient-safe endoscope. Unlike previous outbreaks, these CRE outbreaks occurred even though manufacturer's instructions and professional guidelines were followed correctly. This article reviews why outbreaks associated with endoscopes continue to occur; what alternatives exist that might improve the margin of safety associated with duodenoscope reprocessing; and how to prevent future outbreaks associated with ERCP procedures. The advantages and disadvantages for the proposed enhancements for reprocessing duodenoscopes are reviewed as well as future strategies to prevent GI endoscope-related outbreaks.

Hygiene: The Looming Achilles Heel in Endoscopy

BACKGROUND

Since the late 1970s there have been sporadic reports of nosocomial infections linked to endoscopic procedures. Infections by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) have an increasing impact on healthcare systems worldwide. Since 2010 outbreaks involving MDRO have been reported as a result of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) from the USA, France, Germany and the Netherlands.

METHODS

This article evaluates the recent outbreaks and developments and demonstrates a structural approach to how to prevent future infections. Current national and international guidelines were used as a basis for discussions.

RESULTS

In some cases insufficient cleaning or drying supported the outbreak. In the majority of cases, outbreaks occurred despite the apparently appropriate reprocessing protocols being in use. Microlesions were identified on a number of endoscopes, which supported the growth of bacteria and represented a vehicle for the transmission of infectious material. National official bodies responded with warnings. Manufacturers informed their customers accordingly. Separate, purpose-designed reprocessing rooms and a sufficient number of competent staff provide the structural quality for a safe reprocessing. The process quality includes a thorough cleaning of all endoscope channels and crucial instrument components, followed by an automated and validated reprocessing procedure. Strict adherence to manufacturers' recommendations is essential. The outcome quality should be evaluated by regular audits, validation of reprocessing procedures and microbiological surveillance. If outbreaks occur, a close co-operation with official bodies and manufacturers is essential.

CONCLUSION

Health care professionals and manufacturers should be aware of their responsibility to ensure patient safety. A structural approach is key in prevention of endoscopy-associated infections.

Recent Update on Microbiological Monitoring of Gastrointestinal Endoscopes after High-Level Disinfection

Endoscopy-related infections are important contributors to nosocomial infections. Endoscope reprocessing according to standard guidelines ensures high-level disinfection and prevents endoscopy-related infections. Microbiological surveillance may help in monitoring the effectiveness of gastrointestinal endoscope disinfection. The process involves microbial cultures and non-culture methods such as bioburden assays, adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence, and quantitative polymerase chain reactions (PCRs). Surveillance culturing to monitor endoscopes after reprocessing has been recommended by a majority of organizations. Bioburden assays, ATP bioluminescence, and quantitative PCRs provide rapid and reliable measures. Each institution will have to try to establish its own surveillance guidelines.