Evaluation of a new disinfection procedure for ultrasound probes using ultraviolet light

The Effectiveness of Ultraviolet Smart D60 in Reducing Contamination of Flexible Fiberoptic Laryngoscopes

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of disinfection protocols utilizing a ultraviolet (UV) Smart D60 light system with Impelux™ technology with a standard Cidex ortho-phthalaldehyde (OPA) disinfection protocol for cleaning flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopes (FFLs).

METHODS

Two hundred FFLs were tested for bacterial contamination after routine use, and another 200 FFLs were tested after disinfection with one of four methods: enzymatic detergent plus Cidex OPA (standard), enzymatic detergent plus UV Smart D60, microfiber cloth plus UV Smart D60, and nonsterile wipe plus UV Smart D60. Pre- and post-disinfection microbial burden levels and positive culture rates were compared using Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA and Fisher's two-sided exact, respectively.

RESULTS

After routine use, approximately 56% (112/200) of FFLs were contaminated, with an average contamination level of 9,973.7 ± 70,136.3 CFU/mL. The standard reprocessing method showed no positive cultures. The enzymatic plus UV, microfiber plus UV, and nonsterile wipe plus UV methods yielded contamination rates of 4% (2/50), 6% (3/50), and 12% (6/50), respectively, with no significant differences among the treatment groups (p > 0.05). The pre-disinfection microbial burden levels decreased significantly after each disinfection technique (p < 0.001). The average microbial burden recovered after enzymatic plus UV, microfiber plus UV, and nonsterile wipe plus UV were 0.40 CFU/mL ± 2, 0.60 CFU/mL ± 2.4, and 12.2 CFU/mL ± 69.5, respectively, with no significant difference among the treatment groups (p > 0.05). Micrococcus species (53.8%) were most frequently isolated, and no high-concern organisms were recovered.

CONCLUSION

Disinfection protocols utilizing UV Smart D60 were as effective as the standard chemical disinfection protocol using Cidex OPA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 133:3512-3519, 2023.

Reprocessing semicritical items: An overview and an update on the shift from HLD to sterilization for endoscopes

BACKGROUND

Semicritical medical devices are defined as items that come into contact with mucous membranes or nonintact skin (e.g., gastrointestinal endoscopes, endocavitary probes). Such medical devices require minimally high-level disinfection.

METHODS

Analyze the methods used to reprocess semicritical medical devices and identify methods and new technologies to reduce the risk of infection.

RESULTS

The reprocessing methods for semicritical medical devices is described as well as a shift from high-level disinfection to sterilization for lumened endoscopes.

CONCLUSIONS

Strict adherence to current guidelines and transition to sterilization for endoscopes is required as more outbreaks have been linked to inadequately disinfected endoscopes and other semicritical items than any other reusable medical devices.

Infection Control for Perioperative Ultrasonography and Echocardiography

Ultrasound technology has revolutionized point-of-care diagnostics, decision-making, and the guidance of interventional procedures in Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine. Recent literature has highlighted important infection control considerations when performing transesophageal or transthoracic echocardiography, point-of-care ultrasound, and ultrasound-guided procedures. This narrative review focuses on operator precautions and disinfection methods and summarizes key recommendations from the international Echocardiography and Radiology Societies.

Comparison of the sporicidal activity of a UV disinfection process with three FDA cleared sterilants

BACKGROUND

Endocavitary probes are semi-critical devices and must undergo, at least, high level disinfection (HLD) between uses. Therefore, they should be high level disinfected between uses (i.e., with a product/process that kills all forms of microbial life; bacteria, fungi, mycobacteria, and virus, and in some countries, a demonstrated potential for sporicidal activity). In this study, the sporicidal activity of three common Food and Drug Administration cleared sterilants (CIDEX OPA Solution, SPOROX II Sterilizing and Disinfection Solution and CIDEX Activated Dialdehyde Solution) was compared with the sporicidal activity of an ultraviolet disinfection technology (Hypernova Chronos, Germitec) against Bacillus subtilis ATCC 19659 spores spread on silicone flat carriers in the presence of inorganic and organic soil.

RESULTS

The results indicate that the UV disinfection process presented within a 35 seconds exposure time a sporicidal efficacy substantially higher than the chemical sterilants used according to manufacturer instructions for HLD.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that even if it cannot be tested/approved as a sterilant according to AOAC 966.04, the UV unit is much more effective than usual Food and Drug Administration approved chemical HLD products to kill spores in real use conditions. This finding questions the relevancy of evaluating product efficacy within extended conditions giving results that could mislead users to select the most effective HLD product/process for the reprocessing of their medical devices.

UV surface disinfection in a wearable drug delivery device

The advent of recombinant DNA technology fundamentally altered the drug discovery landscape, replacing traditional small-molecule drugs with protein and peptide-based biologics. Being susceptible to degradation via the oral route, biologics require comparatively invasive injections, most commonly by intravenous infusion (IV). Significant academic and industrial efforts are underway to replace IV transport with subcutaneous delivery by wearable infusion devices. To further complement the ease-of-use and safety of disposable infusion devices, surface disinfection of the drug container can be automated. For ease of use, the desired injector is a combination device, where the drug is inside the injector as a single solution combination device. The main obstacle of the desired solution is the inability to sterilize both injector and drug in the same chamber or using the same method (Gamma for the drug and ETO for the injector). This leads to the assembly of both drug container and injector after sterilization, resulting in at least one transition area that is not sterilized. To automate the delivery of the drug to the patient, a disinfection step before the drug delivery through the injector is required on the none-sterilized interface. As an innovative solution, the autoinjector presented here is designed with a single ultraviolet light-emitting diode (UV LED) for surface disinfection of the drug container and injector interface. In order to validate microbial disinfection similar to ethanol swabbing on the injector, a bacterial 3 or 6 log reduction needed to be demonstrated. However, the small disinfection chamber surfaces within the device are incapable of holding an initial bacterial load for demonstrating the 3 or 6 log reduction, complicating the validation method, and presenting a dilemma as to how to achieve the log reduction while producing real chamber conditions. The suggested solution in this paper is to establish a correlation model between the UV irradiance distribution within the disinfection chamber and a larger external test setup, which can hold the required bacterial load and represents a worse-case test scenario. Bacterial log reduction was subsequently performed on nine different microorganisms of low to high UV-tolerance. The procedure defined herein can be adopted for other surface or chamber disinfection studies in which the inoculation space is limited.

Disinfection of Transvaginal Ultrasound Probes by Ultraviolet C - A clinical Evaluation of Automated and Manual Reprocessing Methods

PURPOSE

 Since pathogens can be transmitted to patients via transvaginal ultrasound probes, it is of particular importance that cleaning and disinfection are performed adequately. This study was designed to do a qualitative comparison of a low-level disinfection technique with disinfectant-impregnated wipes and an automated disinfection technique using ultraviolet C radiation in a clinical setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 The transvaginal ultrasound probes used in two groups of 160 patients were compared in a prospective controlled study regarding the effectiveness of manual low-level disinfection (Mikrozid sensitive wipes) and automated disinfection using ultraviolet C radiation (Antigermix AS1). Microbiological samples were taken from the whole surface of the probe before and after the disinfection process.

RESULTS

 Before disinfection, 98.75 % (316/320) of the samples showed bacterial contamination. After automated and manual disinfection, the contamination rates were 34.2 % (54/158, automated) and 40.5 % (64/158, disinfectant wipes) (p > 0.05). Pathogens with the potential to cause healthcare-associated infections, such as Enterococcus faecalis and Klebsiella pneumoniae, were removed completely by both techniques. Manual disinfection showed a lower contamination rate after disinfection of bacteria that usually belong to the vaginal, pharyngeal and skin flora (disinfectant wipes 10.6 %, 11/104, automated 32.5 %, 38/117) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

 For the clinical routine, automated disinfection with ultraviolet C is a promising technique for transvaginal ultrasound probes because of the simple handling and time efficiency. In our study, this method was completely effective against nosocomial pathogens. However, the study didn't show any significant difference in terms of effectiveness compared to low-level wipe disinfection.

Reprocessing semicritical items: Outbreaks and current issues

Semicritical medical devices are defined as items that come into contact with mucous membranes or nonintact skin (eg, gastrointestinal endoscopes, endocavitary probes). Such medical devices require minimally high-level disinfection. As many of these items are temperature sensitive, low-temperature chemical methods must be used rather than steam sterilization. Strict adherence to current guidelines is required as more outbreaks have been linked to inadequately cleaned or disinfected endoscopes and other semicritical items than any other reusable medical devices.

Reprocessing semicritical items: Current issues and new technologies

Semicritical medical devices are defined as items that come into contact with mucous membranes or nonintact skin (eg, gastrointestinal endoscopes, endocavitary probes). Such medical devices minimally require high-level disinfection. Because many of these items are temperature sensitive, low-temperature chemical methods are usually used rather than steam sterilization. Strict adherence to current guidelines is required because more outbreaks have been linked to inadequately cleaned or disinfected endoscopes and other semicritical items undergoing high-level disinfection than any other reusable medical device.

Transducer hygiene: comparison of procedures for decontamination of ultrasound transducers and their use in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

To determine whether current hygiene practices are appropriate during sonographic examinations.

METHODS

Five major hospitals in Sweden were investigated with a survey. At each hospital, the departments corresponding to the main types of sonographic examination were chosen. Personnel who were responsible for or acquainted with the local hygiene procedures completed a standardardized questionnaire.

RESULTS

The surveys were completed by 25 departments, where the total number of sonographic examinations was approximately 20,000 per month. For transvaginal and transrectal sonographic examinations, the most common method for decontamination of the transducer was barrier protection during the procedure followed by cleansing with alcohol. Latex was the predominant cover material, but one department used polyethylene gloves, and another department used nitrile gloves. Both of these involved transvaginal ultrasonography. In transcutaneous examinations, all hospitals were using alcohol and paper or cloth for decontamination at a minimum. Transesophageal examinations were carried out without barrier protection, and decontamination was performed with an alkylating substance.

CONCLUSIONS

The hygiene practices appear to be appropriate at most hospitals, but there is a prevalence of transducer cover materials of unacceptable permeability, as well as use of gloves on transducers despite insufficient evidence of safety.

Emergency department ultrasound probe infection control: challenges and solutions

Point-of-care ultrasound (US) has become a cornerstone in the diagnosis and treatment of patients in the emergency department (ED). Despite the beneficial impact on patient care, concern exists over repeat use of probes and the role as a vector for pathogen transmission. US probes are used for various applications, with the level of infection risk, based on the Spaulding Classification, ranging from noncritical with common practice to semicritical with endocavitary probes. To date, the most closely studied organisms are Staphylococcus aureus and human papilloma virus. Current evidence does confirm probe colonization but has not established a causative role in human infection. Based on current literature, US use during invasive procedures remains an infection control concern, but routine use on intact skin does not appear to cause significant risk to patients. Various barrier methods are available, each with indications based on extent of procedure and likelihood of contact with mucosal surfaces. Additionally, chemical cleansing methods have been shown to be effective in limiting probe contamination after use. New technologies utilizing ultraviolet light are available and effective but not widely used in the ED setting. As our understanding of the critical factors in US probe cleaning and disinfection improves, it is important to assess the challenges found in our current practice and to identify potential solutions to improve practices and procedures in infection control across the spectrum of US probe use in various applications in the ED. This article serves as a summary of the current literature available on infection control topics with the utilization of point-of-care US, and discusses challenges and potential solutions to improve the current practice of probe-related infection control.

Impact of vaginal-rectal ultrasound examinations with covered and low-level disinfected transducers on infectious transmissions in france

BACKGROUND

The risk of cross-infection from shared ultrasound probes in endorectal and vaginal ultrasonography due to low-level disinfection (LLD) is difficult to estimate because potential infections are also sexually transmitted diseases, and route of contamination is often difficult to establish. In France, the widely used standard for prevention of infections is through the use of probe covers and LLD of the ultrasound transducer by disinfectant wipes. We performed an in silico simulation based on a systematic review to estimate the number of patients infected after endorectal or vaginal ultrasonography examination using LLD for probes.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a stochastic Monte Carlo computer simulation to produce hypothetical cohorts for a population of 4 million annual ultrasound examinations performed in France, and we estimated the number of infected patients for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), herpes simplex virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human papilloma virus, cytomegalovirus, and Chlamydia trachomatis. Modeling parameters were estimated by meta-analysis when possible.

RESULTS

The probability of infection from a contaminated probe ranged from 1% to 6%, depending on the pathogen. For cases of HIV infection, this would result in approximately 60 infected patients per year. For other common viral infections, the number of new cases ranged from 1,600 to 15,000 per year that could be attributable directly to ultrasound and LLD procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Our simulation results showed that, despite cumulative use of probe cover and LLD, there were still some cases of de novo infection that may be attributable to ultrasound procedures. These cases are preventable by reviewing the currently used LLD and/or upgrading LLD to high-level disinfection, as recommended by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Persistence of microbial contamination on transvaginal ultrasound probes despite low-level disinfection procedure

AIM OF THE STUDY

In many countries, Low Level Disinfection (LLD) of covered transvaginal ultrasound probes is recommended between patients' examinations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy of LLD under routine conditions on a range of microorganisms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Samples were taken over a six month period in a private French Radiology Center. 300 specimens derived from endovaginal ultrasound probes were analyzed after disinfection of the probe with wipes impregnated with a quaternary ammonium compound and chlorhexidine. Human papillomavirus (HPV) was sought in the first set of s100 samples, Chlamydia trachomatis and mycoplasmas were searched in the second set of 100 samples, bacteria and fungi in the third 100 set samples. HPV, C. trachomatis and mycoplasmas were detected by PCR amplification. PCR positive samples were subjected to a nuclease treatment before an additional PCR assay to assess the likely viable microorganisms. Bacteria and fungi were investigated by conventional methods.

RESULTS

A substantial persistence of microorganisms was observed on the disinfected probes: HPV DNA was found on 13% of the samples and 7% in nuclease-resistant form. C. trachomatis DNA was detected on 20% of the probes by primary PCR but only 2% after nuclease treatment, while mycoplasma DNA was amplified in 8% and 4%, respectively. Commensal and/or environmental bacterial flora was present on 86% of the probes, occasionally in mixed culture, and at various levels (10->3000 CFU/probe); Staphylococcus aureus was cultured from 4% of the probes (10-560 CFU/probe). No fungi were isolated.

CONCLUSION

Our findings raise concerns about the efficacy of impregnated towels as a sole mean for disinfection of ultrasound probes. Although the ultrasound probes are used with disposable covers, our results highlight the potential risk of cross contamination between patients during ultrasound examination and emphasize the need for reviewing the disinfection procedure.

Comparison of probe disinfection procedures in routine ultrasonography: hot water versus antiseptic wiping

OBJECTIVE

It is commonly known that ultrasonography (US) transducers function as both a reservoir and means of transfer for hospital infections. The current study aimed to compare the antimicrobial effectiveness of using >80 °C water versus antiseptic wipes to disinfect US transducers.

METHODS

Subsequent to abdominal inspections in three groups of 20 patients, a swab culture was taken from the transducer in each case. Neither a mechanical nor chemical disinfection was applied to the transducer in the first group. As for the second group, the transducer was placed in >80 °C hot water for five minutes. In the third group, the transducer was wiped clean using antiseptic wipes.

RESULTS

Of the 60 swab samples collected, 40 did not produce any growth. The number of samples exhibiting growth in the first group involved 18 cases of coagulase-negative staphylococcus (CNS), as well as 15 cases of Listeria spp., one case of Corynebacterium spp. and one case of Bacillus spp., while only one case of CNS was observed in the second and third groups, respectively. The culture growth and colony forming units rate were significantly higher in the samples obtained from the first group than in those obtained from the other groups (p<0.01). As for the second and third groups, no significant differences were found in terms of the amount of colonization and growth (p=1.00).

CONCLUSION

Being a practical and a simple method for particular use in developing and underdeveloped countries, where it is hard to access relatively costly transducer disinfection materials, such as antiseptic wipes, hot water disinfection may play an active role in fighting hospital infections.

Decontamination of transvaginal ultrasound probes: review of national practice and need for national guidelines

AIM

To determine the national practice of transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) probe decontamination in English hospitals and to develop recommendations for guidance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was undertaken to clarify best practice and evaluate methods of decontamination of TVUS probes. A questionnaire was developed to ascertain TVUS probe decontamination programmes in current use within English hospitals. This was sent to ultrasound leads of 100 English hospitals; 68 hospitals responded.

RESULTS

There is a wide variation in TVUS probe decontamination across English hospitals. Although the majority of respondents (87%, 59/68) reported having clear and practical written guidelines for TVUS decontamination, the frequency, methods, and types of decontamination solutions utilized were widely variable and none meet the standards required to achieve high-level disinfection.

CONCLUSION

While the decontamination of other endoluminal medical devices (e.g., flexible endoscopes) is well defined and regulated, the decontamination of TVUS probes has no such guidance. There appears to be incomplete understanding of the level of risk posed by TVUS probes, and in some cases, this has resulted in highly questionable practices regarding TVUS hygiene. There is an urgent need to develop evidence-based national guidance for TVUS probe decontamination.

Evaluation of a new disinfection method for ultrasound probes used for regional anesthesia: ultraviolet C light

OBJECTIVES

Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia is commonly used for block placement. At present, the risk of cross contamination from probes is not well documented. To avoid transmission of infectious agents, several methods have been used for probe disinfection and protection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antibacterial efficacy of a new high-level disinfection method based on ultraviolet C (UV-C) light under routine conditions after block placement with an unprotected probe.

METHODS

The study was after approval by the local Ethics Committee. In the first part of the study, 15 ultrasound probes were exposed to a large inoculum of 3 bacteria. Ultraviolet C disinfection consisted of cleaning the probe with dry and disinfectant-impregnated paper followed by a 90-second UV-C disinfection cycle in a decontamination chamber. A protocol was established to retrieve the probe with sterile gloves after opening the door of the chamber. In the second part, 50 blocks were placed with ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia. The skin was first prepared with an antiseptic solution, and sterile gel was applied; no covers were used to protect the probes. The blocks were then disinfected with UV-C light. Bacteriologic samples were collected before and after the UV-C method and inoculated on chocolate agar plates.

RESULTS

During the first part of the study, all probes were infected after inoculation (>150 colony-forming units) but were considered sterile (<10 colony-forming units) after disinfection. During the second part of the study, all probes were considered sterile before and after disinfection.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultraviolet C disinfection seems relevant for ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia just before block placement. It offers simple, fast, and effective high-level disinfection. Moreover, this method should obviate the use of sterile probe covers, which can improve echogenicity.

Evaluation of ultraviolet C for disinfection of endocavitary ultrasound transducers persistently contaminated despite probe covers

OBJECTIVE

To determine the rate of bacterial and viral contamination of endocavitary ultrasound probes after endorectal or endovaginal examination with the use of probe covers and to evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy of a disinfection procedure consisting of cleaning with a disinfectant-impregnated towel followed by disinfection with ultraviolet C (UVC) light.

METHODS

Endovaginal or endorectal ultrasound examinations were performed for 440 patients in 3 institutions. All probes were covered by a condom or sheath during the examination. For bacterial analysis, 1 swab was applied lengthwise across one-half the surface of the probe just after removal of the probe cover. The second swab was similarly applied over the probe immediately after the end of a 2-step process consisting of cleaning with a towel impregnated with a disinfectant spray and a 5-minute UVC disinfection cycle. Swabs were applied onto plates and incubated for 48 hours. The number of colony-forming units was counted, and organisms were identified. A similar protocol was used for viral detection of Epstein-Barr virus, human cytomegalovirus, and human papillomavirus, except that an additional swab was applied along the entire external surface of the probe cover before its removal. Viruses were detected by means of a polymerase chain reaction-based protocol.

RESULTS

After removal of probe covers, contamination by pathogenic bacteria was found for 15 (3.4% [95% confidence interval, 2.0%-5.6%]) of 440 probes, and viral genome was detected on 5 (1.5% [95% confidence interval, 0.5%-3.5%]) of 336 probes. After cleaning with a towel impregnated with a disinfectant spray and disinfecting with UVC light, neither bacterial pathogenic flora nor viral genome was recovered from the probe.

CONCLUSIONS

Endocavitary ultrasound probes may carry pathogens after removal of covers under routine conditions. A disinfection procedure consisting of cleaning with a disinfectant-impregnated towel followed by disinfection with UVC may provide a useful method for disinfecting endocavitary ultrasound probes.