Surveillance of Endoscopes: Comparison of Different Sampling Techniques

Evidence of transmission of New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae through a gastrointestinal endoscope without an elevator channel

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the source and transmission dynamics of an endoscope-associated New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneumonia (NDM-KP) outbreak.

DESIGN

Epidemiological and genomic investigation.

SETTING

Academic acute care hospital in New Jersey.

PATIENTS

Five patients with active NDM-KP infection identified on clinical isolates, and four NDM-KP colonized patients identified via rectal swab screening.

RESULTS

Over a twelve-month period, nine patients were identified with NDM-KP infection or colonization. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) revealed that all of the identified cases were related by 25 mutational events or less. Seven of the cases were linked to gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures (four clinical cases and three positive screens among patients exposed to endoscopes suspected of transmission). Two cases demonstrated delayed transmission that occurred five months after the initial outbreak, likely through shared usage of a non-therapeutic gastroscope without an elevator channel.

CONCLUSIONS

Although all endoscope cultures in our investigation were negative, the epidemiological link to gastrointestinal endoscopes, the high degree of relatedness via WGS, and the identification of asymptomatic NDM-KP colonization among patients exposed to shared endoscopes make the endoscopic mode of transmission most likely. This investigation highlights the probable transmission of NDM-KP via a gastroscope without an elevator channel, observed several months after an initial outbreak. We hypothesize that persistent mechanical defects may have contributed to the delayed device-related transmission of NDM-KP.

Higher yield in duodenoscope cultures collected with addition of neutralizing agent

AIM

Microbiological cultures are the gold standard in the monitoring of duodenoscope reprocessing. However, many different sampling and culturing techniques are used, making it difficult to compare results. The latest Centers for Disease Control and Prevention protocol advises the use of a neutralizer to deactivate any remaining disinfectants in the samples. This study compared culturing results of duodenoscope samples collected with and without addition of a neutralizer.

METHODS

Six duodenoscopes were soiled with gut bacteria in a non-clinical experimental setting and reprocessed afterwards. Samples of the tip and working channel were collected immediately after decontamination or after drying. Dey-Engley (DE) broth was added as a neutralizer to the samples of four duodenoscopes; samples for the other two duodenoscopes were collected without the addition of DE broth.

RESULTS

Post-decontamination cultures were significantly more likely to be positive for growth of the applied micro-organisms in the group of samples with DE broth (88.1% vs 20.2%; P<0.0001). Post-drying samples were significantly more likely to be positive in the group of samples without DE broth (75.7% vs 33.4%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The addition of DE broth to samples collected from wet duodenoscopes increases the yield of those cultures. Remaining disinfectants in wet duodenoscopes can lead to false-negative results. This can be overcome by adding a neutralizer, such as DE broth, to the samples. The higher yield after drying in the group without neutralizer could be due to biofilm formation in these two duodenoscopes, but this was not investigated. Standardization of the sampling method can help to compare both clinical and study results regarding duodenoscope contamination.

No relation between adenosine triphosphate after manual cleaning and presence of microorganisms on endoscopes after automated high-level disinfection

Background and study aims  Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) tests are increasingly used to detect biological material; however, their reliability to detect bacterial contamination in endoscopes is not proven. We investigated the predictive value of ATP tests after manual cleaning for presence or absence of microorganisms as shown by culture after automated high-level disinfection (HLD) in duodenoscopes and linear echoendoscopes (DLEs). Patients and methods  After manual cleaning, ATP tests were performed on swab samples taken from the detachable cap and forceps elevator, and on flush samples of the DLE working channels. These results were compared to the growth of any microorganisms in cultures acquired after automated HLD. ATP tests with > 200 relative light units (RLU) were considered positive. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare the RLU levels with microbial presence in cultures. Results  In total, 903 procedures were performed involving 26 distinct DLEs. Depending on sample site, 20.8 % (cap) to 63.8 % (channel brush) of the ATP negative samples were accompanied by positive post-HLD cultures. 54.4 % of the cap samples with a positive culture (growth of any kind of microorganism) and 91.8 % of the channel samples with a positive culture had a negative ATP test after manual cleaning. ROC curves per sample site, DLE type and microorganism type all had area under the curves below 0.6. Conclusions  In our study, ATP tests performed after manual cleaning could not predict presence or absence of microorganisms after automated HLD as shown by culture. More than half of the positive cultures were preceded by a negative ATP test.

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.

A narrative review on current duodenoscope reprocessing techniques and novel developments

Duodenoscopy-associated infections occur worldwide despite strict adherence to reprocessing standards. The exact scope of the problem remains unknown because a standardized sampling protocol and uniform sampling techniques are lacking. The currently available multi-society protocol for microbial culturing by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the American Society for Microbiology, published in 2018 is too laborious for broad clinical implementation. A more practical sampling protocol would result in increased accessibility and widespread implementation. This will aid to reduce the prevalence of duodenoscope contamination. To reduce the risk of duodenoscopy-associated pathogen transmission the FDA advised four supplemental reprocessing measures. These measures include double high-level disinfection, microbiological culturing and quarantine, ethylene oxide gas sterilization and liquid chemical sterilization. When the supplemental measures were advised in 2015 data evaluating their efficacy were sparse. Over the past five years data regarding the supplemental measures have become available that place the efficacy of the supplemental measures into context. As expected the advised supplemental measures have resulted in increased costs and reprocessing time. Unfortunately, it has also become clear that the efficacy of the supplemental measures falls short and that duodenoscope contamination remains a problem. There is a lot of research into new reprocessing methods and technical applications trying to solve the problem of duodenoscope contamination. Several promising developments such as single-use duodenoscopes, electrolyzed acidic water, and vaporized hydrogen peroxide plasma are already applied in a clinical setting.

Comparison of channel sampling methods and brush heads in surveillance culture of endoscope reprocessing: A propensity score matching and paired study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy-related infections have caused multiple outbreaks. The importance of surveillance culture is gradually recognized, but sampling techniques are not consistent in many guidelines. It is unclear whether the Flush-Brush-Flush sampling method (FBFSM) is more sensitive than the conventional flush sampling method (CFSM) and whether different sampling brushes have different effects.

METHODS

The propensity score matching method was done with two matching ways, 1:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching and full matching was used to analyze the surveillance culture data collected by FBFSM and CFSM. We fit a confounder-adjusted multiple generalized linear logistic regression model to estimate the marginal odds ratio (OR). A paired study was applied to compare the sampling effect of polyurethane foam (PU) head brush and polyamide (PA) head brush.

RESULT

From 2016 to 2020, 316 reprocessed endoscope samples were collected from all 59 endoscopy centers in Tianjin. About 279 (88.3%) reprocessed endoscopes met the threshold of Chinese national standards (<20 CFU/Channel). The qualified rate of reprocessed endoscopes sampling by CFSM (91.8%) and FBFSM (81.6%) was statistically different (p < 0.05). The adjusted OR by full matching for FBFSM was 7.98 (95% confidence interval: 3.35-21.78). Forty one pairs of colonoscopes, after reprocessing from 27 centers, were tested by PA and PU brushes, and no difference was found in microbial recovery.

CONCLUSION

FBFSM was confirmed to be a more sensitive sampling technique. PU and PA brushes had no significant difference in sampling effect.

Multisocieties position paper: Microbiological surveillance on flexible endoscopes

Transmission with endoscopes, particularly duodenoscope, of potential lethal infections prompted different scientific societies to deliver recommendations aimed reducing this risk. Some International societies extended recommendations on microbial surveillance to all the endoscopes and devices used in the reprocessing procedure. Considering the relevance of the topic, 8 Italian scientific societies of physicians, nurses and technical operators prepared a concerted document taking into account Institutional advisories and facilities in Italy. The rules for a correct microbial surveillance on endoscopes were detailed in term of what, how and when to perform the procedure, also suggesting behaviors in case of contamination.

Does the Reprocessing of Endoscopes Have to Take Place Immediately after Pre-Cleaning? A First Evaluation

Background/Aims

The recommendations on the time interval between pre-cleaning and reprocessing of endoscopes differ in international guidelines, with a low level of evidence. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of postponing reprocessing on the reprocessing quality after pre-cleaning the flexible endoscopes.

Methods

We reprocessed 124 standardized test tubes simulating endoscope channels after soiling and contamination and determined the reprocessing performance. In addition, we examined contaminated gastroscopes, colonoscopes, and bronchoscopes. The duration of interim storage after pre-cleaning was 16 h for 100 test tubes and up to 24 h for 18 endoscopes. We determined the residual protein content and germ load as markers for cleaning and disinfection performance. In addition, we determined biofilm formation by photometry of crystal violet staining.

Results

All test tubes and flexible endoscopes showed residual protein content and germ load significantly below legally prescribed threshold values, independent of the interval between pre-cleaning and reprocessing.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that flexible endoscopes could be stored overnight after pre-cleaning without any influence on the quality of reprocessing. While ensuring patient safety, this could simplify logistical processes and enable cost savings.

Microbiological Surveillance of Endoscopes in a Southern Italian Transplantation Hospital: A Retrospective Study from 2016 to 2019

Endoscopes are medical instruments that are used routinely in health structures. Due to their invasive nature and contact with many patients, they may cause hospital-acquired infections if not disinfected correctly. To ensure a high-level disinfection procedure or reprocessing, since the methods currently adopted in our institute are adequate, we evaluated retrospectively the presence of microorganisms in our endoscopes after reprocessing. Microbiological surveillance was performed from January 2016 to December 2019 in the instruments in use in our endoscopic room after reprocessing. In total, 35 endoscopes (3 duodenoscopes, 3 echoendoscopes, 12 bronchoscopes, 5 colonoscopes, and 12 gastroscopes) were evaluated for the presence of microorganisms, including multidrug-resistant pathogens and indicator microorganisms (IMOs). Our procedures were in agreement with an internal protocol based on Italian, international, and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations. Of a total of 811 samples, 799 (98.5%) complied with the regulatory guidelines, while 9 (1.1%) were positive for IMOs, and 3 (0.4%) displayed more than 10 colony-forming units (CFU) of environmental and commensal pathogens. Our results show that the internal reprocessing protocol is very efficient, leading to a very low number of observed contaminations, and it could be easily implemented by other health facilities that face a huge number of hospital-acquired infections due to incorrectly disinfected endoscopes.

Improving the Reprocessing Quality of Flexible Thermolabile Endoscopes: How to Learn from Mistakes

Background: Failure in the reprocessing of thermolabile flexible endoscopes has been reported as one of the most important threats to patient health. Method: A case report and observational study was conducted, from August 2014 to December 2019, in the Digestive Endoscopy Unit of a University Hospital in Italy, where two cases of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae infections in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography were observed. Following the risk/safety management practices, an epidemiological investigation was started, duodenoscopes were removed from use and the reprocessing practices reviewed. Moreover, microbiological surveillance of endoscopes was carried out according to the CDC guidelines. Results: In the first phase of sampling, 10/10 (100%) endoscopes were found to be non-compliant, of which 7 showed results for high-concern organisms (HCOs), such as KPC-K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa and E. coli. After implementing corrective actions, 12 out of 17 endoscopes were found to be non-compliant (70.5%), of which 8 showed results for HCOs, such as KPC-K. oxytoca and P. aeruginosa. During the last year of regular microbiological surveillance, only 23% of endoscopes (35/152) were found to be non-compliant, of which 7 showed results for HCOs, such as NDM-K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii. The crucial issues were related to samples collected from the internal channels of duodenoscopes. Conclusion: Managing the risk associated with the reprocessing of digestive endoscopes, through risk assessment at every stage of the process, is important for the prevention of infections associated with the use of these device.

Is a Fundamental Design Change for Gastrointestinal Endoscopes Required?

Since the first fiberoptic instruments, gastrointestinal endoscopy has shaped the field of gastroenterology and is now a key diagnostic and therapeutic tool. Compared with the initial fiberoptic endoscopes state-of-the-art optical chips (or charge-coupled device technology) allowed a quantum leap in image quality. Despite these advances, gastrointestinal endoscopy is far from being perfect. The diagnostic yield (eg, for adenoma detection rates) is highly operator dependent and there is still the need for sedation or even anesthesia to address discomfort during the procedure. Despite highly standardized cleaning and high-level disinfection the reuse of contemporary (and difficult to clean) endoscopes with multiple channels exposes patients to the risk of transmission of infections. Artificial intelligence and pattern recognition should eliminate interindividual variability including polyp detection rates, self-propelled, and (potentially remotely controlled) scopes with a soft shaft could reduce the discomfort during procedures and abolish the need for sedation and anesthesia altogether and single-use designs should eliminate the risk of patient-to-patient transmission of infections. While these innovations are feasible and could be implemented rapidly utilizing available technology, they require a paradigm shift affecting all levels of the value chain from the supplier of the instruments to the end-users. Some may negate the need for a paradigm shift, but it is evident that a major redesign of the endoscopic equipment is overdue to fully utilize novel technologies and most importantly ensure the best possible outcomes for patients.

Introduction to Transmission of Infection: Potential Agents Transmitted by Endoscopy

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

The importance of sampling technique and rinse water for assessing flexible gastrointestinal endoscope reprocessing: A 3-year study covering 59 centers

BACKGROUND

Various guidelines recommend several sampling techniques to verify endoscope reprocessing, but a comparative study of the efficiency for recovering microorganisms was rare. Our goal was to compare different sampling techniques for the postreprocessing endoscope to assess residual bacterial contamination and analysis of the critical factors affecting the endoscope reprocessing failure.

METHODS

From 2016 to 2018, 3 techniques, the conventional flushing sampling method, flush-brush-flush sampling method (FBFSM), and pump-assisted sampling method (PASM), were compared covering all 59 endoscope units in Tianjin, China.

RESULTS

A total of 237 (84.64%) flushing channel samples and 110 (61.11%) final rinse water samples met the Chinese national standard. The univariate analysis showed that the qualified rates of endoscope reprocessing sampled by PASM (65.52%) and FBFSM (75%) were significantly lower than those of the conventional flushing sampling method (91.38%). Five other factors, including the final rinse water, dry, and hospital level, were potential factors besides sample technique. The multivariate logistic analysis indicated only 2 factors (sampling technique and final rinse water) remained in the model. FBFSM, PASM, and the purified water were significantly associated with the odds of endoscope reprocessing failure, with the odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of which were 4.206 (1.757-10.067), 5.326 (2.463-11.645), and 0.309 (0.137-0.695), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The problem of residual microorganisms of the postreprocessing endoscope was severe. Sampling technique and final rinse water were critical for endoscope reprocessing verification.

Turbulent fluid flow is a novel closed-system sample extraction method for flexible endoscope channels of various inner diameters

OVERVIEW

Effective sample extraction from endoscope channels is crucial for monitoring manual cleaning adequacy as well as for ensuring optimal sensitivity for culture after disinfection. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of Turbulent Fluid Flow (TFF) to Flush (F) or Flush-Brush-Flush (FBF) methods.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis in artificial test soil-2015 (ATS2015) were used as bacterial markers while protein and carbohydrate were the organic markers for biofilm formed inside 3.2-mm and 1.37-mm polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) channels. TFF was generated using compressed air and sterile water to provide friction for sample extraction. Extraction for biofilm coated PTFE channels as well as for colonoscope channels perfused with ATS2015 containing 108 CFU/mL P. aeruginosa, E. faecalis and Candida albicans was determined using TFF compared to FBF and F.

RESULTS

The extraction ratio for P. aeruginosa and E. faecalis from biofilm extracted by TFF compared to the positive control was significantly better than F for 1.37-mm channels (≥0.94 for both bacteria by TFF versus 0.69 to 0.72 by F for P. aeruginosa and E. faecalis, respectively) but not significantly different between TFF and FBF for 3.2-mm channels. F was also ineffective for extraction of protein and carbohydrate from 1.37-mm channels. Extraction efficacy by TFF from inoculated colonoscope channels was >98% for all test markers.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel TFF method for extraction of samples from colonoscope channels is a more effective method than the existing FBF and F methods.

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.

Impact of cleaning monitoring combined with channel purge storage on elimination of Escherichia coli and environmental bacteria from duodenoscopes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aimed to determine whether monitoring of duodenoscope cleaning by rapid adenosine triphosphate (ATP) combined with channel-purge storage could eliminate high-concern microorganisms.

METHODS

In a simulated-use study, suction channels, as well as lever recesses, from 2 duodenoscopes models and the unsealed elevator guidewire (EGW) channel from 1 of these 2 duodenoscopes (the other model has a sealed EGW) were perfused with ATS2015 containing approximately 8 Log₁₀ colony-forming units (CFU)/mL of both Enterococcus faecalis and Escherichia coli. Pump-assisted cleaning was monitored by rapid ATP testing. Duodenoscopes exceeding 200 relative light units (RLUs) were recleaned. Clean duodenoscopes were processed through an automated endoscope reprocessor and then stored in a channel-purge storage cabinet for 1 to 3 days. Cultures of EGW channel and instrument channel combined with the lever recess (IC-LR) were taken after storage. The impacts of extended cleaning and alcohol flush were evaluated.

RESULTS

E coli was reliably eliminated in IC-LR and EGW channels of 119 duodenoscope tests (59 with sealed EGW and 60 with nonsealed EGW). However, actionable levels of E faecalis and environmental bacteria persisted. Neither alcohol flush nor extended cleaning resulted in a reduction of actionable levels for these organisms. Identification of isolates indicated that residual organisms in duodenoscope channels were hardy Gram-positive bacteria (often spore formers) that likely originated from environmental sources.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate that high-concern Gram-negative bacteria but not E faecalis or environmental bacteria can be reliably eliminated by use of the manufacturer's instructions for reprocessing with ATP monitoring of cleaning and channel-purge storage conditions.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Sterile Reverse Osmosis Water Combined with Friction Are Optimal for Channel and Lever Cavity Sample Collection of Flexible Duodenoscopes

Introduction

Simulated-use buildup biofilm (BBF) model was used to assess various extraction fluids and friction methods to determine the optimal sample collection method for polytetrafluorethylene channels. In addition, simulated-use testing was performed for the channel and lever cavity of duodenoscopes.

Materials and methods

BBF was formed in polytetrafluorethylene channels using Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Sterile reverse osmosis (RO) water, and phosphate-buffered saline with and without Tween80 as well as two neutralizing broths (Letheen and Dey-Engley) were each assessed with and without friction. Neutralizer was added immediately after sample collection and samples concentrated using centrifugation. Simulated-use testing was done using TJF-Q180V and JF-140F Olympus duodenoscopes.

Results

Despite variability in the bacterial CFU in the BBF model, none of the extraction fluids tested were significantly better than RO. Borescope examination showed far less residual material when friction was part of the extraction protocol. The RO for flush-brush-flush (FBF) extraction provided significantly better recovery of E. coli (p = 0.02) from duodenoscope lever cavities compared to the CDC flush method.

Discussion and conclusion

We recommend RO with friction for FBF extraction of the channel and lever cavity of duodenoscopes. Neutralizer and sample concentration optimize recovery of viable bacteria on culture.