Prospective assessment of the effectiveness of standard high-level disinfection for echoendoscopes

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound endoscope reprocessing: Variables impacting contamination risk

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate variables that affect risk of contamination for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound endoscopes.

DESIGN

Observational, quality improvement study.

SETTING

University medical center with a gastrointestinal endoscopy service performing ∼1,000 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and ∼1,000 endoscopic ultrasound endoscope procedures annually.

METHODS

Duodenoscope and linear echoendoscope sampling (from the elevator mechanism and instrument channel) was performed from June 2020 through September 2021. Operational changes during this period included standard reprocessing with high-level disinfection with ethylene oxide gas sterilization (HLD-ETO) was switched to double high-level disinfection (dHLD) (June 16, 2020-July 15, 2020), and duodenoscopes changed to disposable tip model (March 2021). The frequency of contamination for the co-primary outcomes were characterized by calculated risk ratios.

RESULTS

The overall pathogenic contamination rate was 4.72% (6 of 127). Compared to duodenoscopes, linear echoendoscopes had a contamination risk ratio of 3.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-19.1). Reprocessing using HLD-ETO was associated with a contamination risk ratio of 0.29 (95% CI, 0.06-1.54). Linear echoendoscopes undergoing dHLD had the highest risk of contamination (2 of 18, 11.1%), and duodenoscopes undergoing HLD-ETO and the lowest risk of contamination (0 of 53, 0%). Duodenoscopes with a disposable tip had a 0% contamination rate (0 of 27).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not detect a significant reduction in endoscope contamination using HLD-ETO versus dHLD reprocessing. Linear echoendoscopes have a risk of contamination similar to that of duodenoscopes. Disposable tips may reduce the risk of duodenoscope contamination.

How effective are the alcohol flush and drying cycles of automated endoscope reprocessors? Stripped endoscope model

BACKGROUND

Effective drying of the internal channels of endoscopes is essential to prevent the growth of water-borne pathogens and to assure adequate sterilization with vaporized hydrogen peroxide or ethylene oxide. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dryness of endoscopes after a routine disinfection process in an automated endoscope reprocessor.

METHODS

Stripped endoscopes (SE) that allow for visual inspection of the inside channels were reprocessed per protocol in a large urban medical center, with a 3-minute or 10-minute air flush following reprocessing. SE was hung and observed for any water within the channels after reprocessing and after a week of ambient storage. Ready-for-use endoscopes were also randomly spot-checked for moisture visually and with moisture detection paper.

RESULTS

All SE were grossly wet after HLD with a 3-minute air flush, despite alcohol flush and drying cycle. The 10-minute air flush was effective at drying the biopsy/suction channel, but not the air/water channels. Hanging had limited effect, being most effective in the biopsy/suction channels. Of the 77 ready-for-use respiratory and gastrointestinal endoscopes assessed, 37 (48.1%) showed evidence of retained moisture.

CONCLUSIONS

Air flush cycles commonly used in the final steps of automated endoscope reprocessing may not adequately dry endoscope channels, particularly the narrower diameter air/water channels. An extended 10-minute air flush appears effective at drying the larger biopsy/suction channel, but has limited effect on the air/water channels.

Gastrointestinal endoscope contamination rates - elevators are not only to blame: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Duodenoscopes that are contaminated due to inadequate reprocessing are well-documented. However, studies have demonstrated poor reprocessing of other kinds of endoscopes as well, including echoendoscopes, gastroscopes, and colonoscopes. We estimated the contamination rate beyond the elevator of gastrointestinal endoscopes based on available data. Methods  We searched PubMed and Embase from January 1, 2010 to October 10, 2020, for studies investigating contamination rates of reprocessed gastrointestinal endoscopes. A random-effects model was used to calculate the contamination rate of patient-ready gastrointestinal endoscopes. Subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate differences among endoscope types, countries, and colony-forming unit (CFU) thresholds. Results  Twenty studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 1,059 positive cultures from 7,903 samples. The total contamination rate was 19.98 % ± 0.024 (95 % confidence interval [Cl]: 15.29 %-24.68 %; I ²  = 98.6 %). The contamination rates of colonoscope and gastroscope channels were 31.95 % ± 0.084 and 28.22 % ± 0.076, respectively. Duodenoscope channels showed a contamination rate of 14.41 % ± 0.029. The contamination rates among studies conducted in North America and Europe were 6.01 % ± 0.011 and 18.16% ± 0.053 %, respectively. The contamination rate among studies using a CFU threshold > 20 showed contamination of 30.36 % ± 0.094, whereas studies using a CFU threshold < 20 showed a contamination rate of 11 % ± 0.026. Conclusions  On average, 19.98 % of reprocessed gastrointestinal endoscopes may be contaminated when used in patients and varies between different geographies. These findings highlight that the elevator mechanism is not the only obstacle when reprocessing reusable endoscopes; therefore, guidelines should recommend more surveillance of the endoscope channels as well.

Contaminated flexible endoscopes: Review of impact of channel sampling methods on culture results and recommendations for root-cause analysis

Recently, infection transmission risk associated with contaminated, patient-ready flexible endoscopes has attracted attention. Outbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms resulting in infection and/or colonization have been particularly concerning. Recent CDC and FDA recommendations focus on reducing "exogenous" infection transmission and specifically recommend that endoscopy sites have quality systems in place for endoscope reprocessing. Another key recommendation is the culture of patient-ready endoscopes to detect contamination with organisms of concern. Remaining gaps in the guidelines include ensuring that optimal endoscope-channel sample methods are used and ensuring effective root-cause analysis and remediation when contamination is detected. In this review, we summarize the critical aspects of endoscope sample collection and present a practical approach to root-cause analysis and remedial action plans.

Double high-level disinfection versus liquid chemical sterilization for reprocessing of duodenoscopes used for ERCP: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The potential for transmission of pathogenic organisms is a problem inherent to the current reusable duodenoscope design. Recent outbreaks of multidrug-resistant pathogenic organisms transmitted via duodenoscopes has brought to light the urgency of this problem. Microbiologic culturing of duodenoscopes and reprocessing with repeat high-level disinfection (HLD) or liquid chemical sterilization (LCS) have been offered as supplemental measures to enhance duodenoscope reprocessing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. This study aims to compare the efficacy of reprocessing duodenoscopes with double HLD (DHLD) versus LCS.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 2 different modalities of duodenoscope reprocessing from October 23, 2017 to September 24, 2018. Eligible duodenoscopes were randomly segregated to be reprocessed by either DHLD or LCS. Duodenoscopes were randomly cultured after reprocessing for surveillance based on an internal protocol.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 878 post-reprocessing surveillance cultures (453 in the DHLD group and 425 in the LCS group). Of all cultures, 17 were positive for any organism (1.9%). There was no significant difference of positive cultures when comparing the duodenoscopes undergoing DHLD (8 positive cultures, 1.8%) with duodenoscopes undergoing LCS (9 positive cultures, 2.1%; P = .8). Both groups had 2 cultures that grew high-concern organisms (.5% vs .5%, P=1.0). No multidrug-resistant organisms, including carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae, were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

DHLD and LCS both resulted in a low rate of positive cultures, for all organisms and for high-concern organisms. However, neither process completely eliminated positive cultures from duodenoscopes reprocessed with 2 different supplemental reprocessing strategies.

GIE Editorial Board top 10 topics: advances in GI endoscopy in 2019

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy's GIE Editorial Board reviewed original endoscopy-related articles published during 2019 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other leading medical and gastroenterology journals. Votes from each individual member were tallied to identify a consensus list of 10 topic areas of major advances in GI endoscopy. Individual board members summarized important findings published in these 10 areas of disinfection, artificial intelligence, bariatric endoscopy, adenoma detection, polypectomy, novel imaging, Barrett's esophagus, third space endoscopy, interventional EUS, and training. This document summarizes these "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2019.

The Roles of Endoscopic Ultrasound and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in the Evaluation and Treatment of Chronic Pancreatitis in Children: A Position Paper From the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition Pancreas Committee

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric chronic pancreatitis is increasingly diagnosed. Endoscopic methods [endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)] are useful tools to diagnose and manage chronic pancreatitis. Pediatric knowledge and use of these modalities is limited and warrants dissemination.

METHODS

Literature review of publications relating to use of ERCP and EUS for diagnosis and/or management of chronic pancreatitis with special attention to studies involving 0--18 years old subjects was conducted with summaries generated. Recommendations were developed and voted upon by authors.

RESULTS

Both EUS and ERCP can be used even in small children to assist in diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis in cases where cross-sectional imaging is not sufficient to diagnose or characterize the disease. Children under 15 kg for EUS and 10 kg for ERCP can be technically challenging. These procedures should be done optimally by appropriately trained endoscopists and adult gastroenterology providers with appropriate experience treating children. EUS and ERCP-related risks both include perforation, bleeding and pancreatitis. EUS is the preferred diagnostic modality over ERCP because of lower complication rates overall. Both modalities can be used for management of chronic pancreatitis -related fluid collections. ERCP has successfully been used to manage pancreatic duct stones.

CONCLUSION

EUS and ERCP can be safely used to diagnose chronic pancreatitis in pediatric patients and assist in management of chronic pancreatitis-related complications. Procedure-related risks are similar to those seen in adults, with EUS having a safer risk profile overall. The recent increase in pediatric-trained specialists will improve access of these modalities for children.

Improving patient safety in the endoscopy unit: utilization of remote video auditing to improve time-out compliance

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patient and procedure verification, or the time-out process (TOP), is considered one of the most vital components of patient safety. It has long been a focus of intervention in the surgical community and recently was incorporated into the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines for safety in the GI endoscopy unit. The TOP has had limited attention in the endoscopy literature but remains an area for improvement in clinical endoscopy practice. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and improve TOP compliance rates in our endoscopy unit using remote video auditing (RVA).

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective, pilot initiative in an endoscopy unit at a tertiary care academic medical center. Video cameras with offsite monitoring were installed in each procedure room in our endoscopy suite in November 2016. Baseline TOP compliance rates were audited with RVA over a 2-month period. A multidisciplinary quality improvement team reviewed the data, identified barriers to the TOP, and implemented actionable items in January 2017. TOP compliance rates were again monitored via RVA, and data were collected through October 2018. Pre- and postintervention TOP compliance rates were compared.

RESULTS

Over the baseline period, 692 procedures were audited and TOP compliance documented. Baseline TOP compliance rate was 69.6%. Identifiable barriers to TOP compliance included a lack of designated team member to lead TOP, inconsistent documentation of TOP, irrelevant safety checklist items not applicable to endoscopic procedures, and lack of patient safety culture. Actionable items implemented in response to these barriers included designation of a TOP leader, visual indication of initiation of TOP, creation of a concise endoscopy-specific safety checklist, and formal notification/education of the entire endoscopy team. Postintervention TOP compliance rates were then audited from January 2017 to October 2018 and included 12,008 procedures. The mean TOP compliance rate significantly improved from baseline (95.3% vs 69.6%; 95% confidence interval, 22.4-29.3; P < .0001). Additionally, the improvement was maintained throughout the entire postintervention observation period.

CONCLUSIONS

TOP compliance rates significantly improved in our endoscopy unit through the use of RVA and implementation of 4 actionable items. Future studies should evaluate the reproducibility of this method in other endoscopy units.