STANDARDS OF INFECTION PREVENTION IN REPROCESSING FLEXIBLE GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPES

Effect of an automated flexible endoscope channel brushing system on improving reprocessing quality: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Qualified reprocessing, of which meticulous channel brushing is the most crucial step, is essential for prevention and control of endoscopy-associated infections. However, channel brushing is often omitted in practice. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an automated flexible endoscope channel brushing system (AECBS) on improving the quality of endoscope reprocessing.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted between 24 November 2021 and 22 January 2022 at Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China. Eligible endoscopes were randomly allocated to the auto group (channels brushed by AECBS) or the manual group (channels brushed manually), with sampling and culturing after high-level disinfection and drying. The primary end point was the proportion of endoscopes with positive cultures.

RESULTS

204 endoscopes in the auto group and 205 in the manual group were analyzed. The proportion of endoscopes with positive cultures was significantly lower in the auto group (15.2 % [95 %CI 10.7 %-21.0 %]) than in the manual group (23.4 % [95 %CI 17.9 %-29.9 %]).

CONCLUSIONS

AECBS could effectively reduce bioburden and improve reprocessing quality of gastroscopes and colonoscopes. AECBS has the potential to replace manual brushing and lower the risk of endoscopy-associated infections, providing a new option for the optimization of reprocessing.

Current State and Future of Infection Prevention in Endoscopy

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy units tend to be busy environments in which numerous categories of staff provide moderately complex procedural care to high volumes of patients. The prevention of infections of both patients and staff is a never-ending endeavor for both inpatient and outpatient environments. Necessary considerations must address patient-to-staff, staff-to-patient, environmental, and device-related transmission of infection. In addition to the typical environmental and interpersonal infection risks present in all medical environments, the major concern within the endoscopy suite relates to contamination and potential transmission via reusable devices and endoscopes. Our understanding of this ever-present issue has evolved over time and has become a major focus of scrutiny in the past 5 years. This significant problem has stimulated guidance and ingenuity by regulators, investigators, and industry. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 to 21 has also added significant burdens to our infection control efforts in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

The State of Microbiological Cleanliness of Surfaces and Equipment of an Endoscopic Examination Laboratory-Data from a Reference Tertiary Clinical Endoscopy Center in Southern Poland

The increasing number of endoscopic procedures performed and their increasing invasiveness mean that endoscopy of the gastrointestinal tract is associated with the risk of transmitting pathogenic microorganisms through infected equipment or contact with other patients and medical staff. In order to ensure protection of the health of both patients and medical staff, endoscopy laboratories should meet high hygiene standards. The results of tests of the microbiological cleanliness of surfaces and equipment of an endoscopic examination laboratory performed in the period from January to December 2019 at the Provincial Clinical Hospital No. 2 in Rzeszow were assessed retrospectively. Samples for testing were collected by swabbing from places where microbiological contamination was the most likely and cleaning was the most difficult. In the analyzed period, a total of 86 samples were collected for microbiological tests, of which positive results accounted for 6.9%. Positive results were obtained mainly from swabs collected from wet surfaces (66.7%). Most of the isolated microorganisms were Gram-negative bacteria (66.7% of all positive tests) and they were: Acinetobacter junii, Ralstonia pickettii, and Achromobacter denitrificans. The condition of the microbiological cleanliness of the surfaces and equipment of the endoscopic examination laboratory was satisfactory. A very low level of microbiological contamination of the tested items indicates occasional shortcomings in the decontamination processes. Since microorganisms isolated from the collected samples may be the cause of infection in patients and medical personnel, it is necessary to verify the decontamination procedures applied and to continue periodic microbiological monitoring of their effectiveness.

Efficacy of flexible endoscope drying using novel endoscope test articles that allow direct visualization of the internal channel systems

BACKGROUND

Thorough drying of flexible endoscope channels has been identified as an essential reprocessing step. Yet, instructions are not specific on how to dry endoscopes. There is lack of data supporting efficacy of current drying practices, due to limitations in determining channel dryness.

METHODS

Novel endoscope test articles were used to evaluate the effectiveness of alcohol flush and hanging in an ambient endoscope storage cabinet. Prepared test articles were hung in a storage cabinet for 5 days and visually inspected for residual liquid. The procedure for preoperative inspection of endoscopic systems was performed to determine the procedure's efficacy for removing residual liquid. Then, testing was performed to assess the impact of pressure, residual liquid type and route of air application on time to dry using compressed air.

RESULTS

Alcohol flush followed by hanging in an ambient storage cabinet was not effective for drying endoscope channels, and residual liquid was not completely removed after performing the steps of the preoperative inspection of endoscopic channels. The factors impacting effective compressed air drying were channel dependent. For some channels, alcohol increased the time to dry.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscope drying is complex; borescope evaluation does not ensure a dry device.

Recent Advances in Endoscope Disinfection: Where Do We Stand in the COVID era?

Over 16 million cases worldwide, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has profoundly affected healthcare as we know it. Given reports of gastrointestinal involvement and viral shedding in the stool, it is unsurprising there are concerns that endoscopic equipment may be a potential vector of viral transmission. Here, we provide an overview of existing practices for endoscope reprocessing, recent developments in the field, and challenges in the COVID-19 environment. Current multi-society guidelines do not advise any change to endoscope disinfection protocols but emphasize strict adherence to recommended practices. However, endoscopy reprocessing staff may benefit from supplemental personal protective equipment measures, especially in high risk situations. Because thorough endoscope reprocessing is highly operator dependent, adequate training of personnel is critical for proper manual cleaning and disinfection of endoscopes that have potential to harbor virus. Bacterial contamination of duodenoscopes has caused outbreaks of infection from multidrug-resistant organisms, highlighting vulnerable areas. The emphasis of current studies is on optimization of disinfection and drying, minimization of simethicone use, and on quality control of endoscope reprocessing with sampling and microbiological culturing. Recent advances include novel approaches to endoscope sterilization, infection barrier methods, and design of partially or fully disposable duodenoscopes. Overall, the available data indicate that, when correctly executed, current reprocessing practices are sufficient in preventing SARS-COV-2 transmission.

Society Guidelines-Where Is the Consensus?

With reports of ongoing duodenoscope contamination and pathogen transmission despite strict adherence to manufacturer reprocessing instructions, professional societies continue to release updated recommendations. Despite general guideline similarities, there are differences. Although adherence to guidelines does not entirely eliminate pathogen contamination or transmission, it is critical to strictly adhere to updated guidelines for maximum risk reduction. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention continue to offer updates regarding improved duodenoscope reprocessing techniques and endoscope design. This article critically analyzes currently available national and international duodenoscope reprocessing guidelines.

Quality Indicators and Outcome Measures of Endoscopy in the National Cancer Screening Program

PURPOSE

Quality indicators of the National Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program (NEQIP) and outcome measures of endoscopy in the National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) in Korea are not clear. We evaluated the quality indicators of the revised NEQIP and outcome measures of endoscopy at different types of healthcare facilities participating in the NCSP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted between March and August 2018 in primary, secondary, and tertiary healthcare facilities that perform endoscopy as a part of the NCSP. Representative endoscopists completed a questionnaire for quality indicators of the NEQIP and provided data on outcome measures for endoscopy.

RESULTS

Quality indicators of the NEQIP were mostly acceptable. However, the quality indicators for annual volume of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy, training for endoscopy quality improvement by endoscopy nursing staff, colonoscopy reports, documentation of pathologic lesions, quality of endoscopy reprocessing areas, and completion of endoscopy reprocessing education programs were suboptimal. For outcome measures of EGD, the number of photo-documentations and total procedure time were higher at tertiary healthcare facilities than at other facilities (p<0.001 and p=0.023, respectively). For the outcome measures of colonoscopy, colonoscopy completion rate and waiting times for colonoscopy were significantly higher at tertiary healthcare facilities than at other facilities (both p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Outcome measures of endoscopy should be included as quality indicators of NCSP. However, universal outcome measures for all types of healthcare facilities should be established because performance levels of some outcome measures differ among individual healthcare facility types.

A Systematic Review of Disposable Sheath Use During Flexible Endoscopy

Flexible endoscopes are exposed to blood, mucus, and other secretions during procedures. Single-use sheaths are designed to prevent contact between contaminants and reusable endoscope components. This systematic review examined findings from 22 studies that assessed endoscopic sheath use during urologic, gastrointestinal, or respiratory procedures. The evidence showed that sheaths were durable and yielded faster endoscope turnover times because their reusable components did not require high-level disinfection or sterilization. After a brief learning period, health care providers successfully assembled and maneuvered sheathed endoscopes. Patients generally did not experience greater discomfort during procedures in which sheaths were used. Microbial cultures of sheathed endoscopes were negative or similar to unsheathed endoscopes. More research is needed to evaluate the potential effect of disposable sheaths on infection risks. The evidence suggests that sheaths are a viable option for reliably providing a barrier between endoscopes and patients without affecting the quality of endoscopic procedures.

Evaluation of 12-Week Shelf Life of Patient-Ready Endoscopes

Current research suggests that for certain types of gastrointestinal endoscopes, longer shelf life (the interval of storage after which endoscopes should be reprocessed before their reuse) may not increase the likelihood of endoscope contamination. Scope contamination may, in fact, be related primarily to either inadequate disinfection processes or inadvertent contamination during storage, not to duration of storage. The purpose of this study evaluated the presence of bacteria and fungus following liquid chemical sterilization in colonoscopes and gastroscopes, after 12 weeks of shelf life during which time personal protective equipment was used during endoscope storage cabinet access. We stored four colonoscopes and two gastroscopes in a cabinet for 12 weeks after liquid chemical sterilization and the cabinet was only accessed during the 12-week period wearing personal protective equipment (gown and gloves). Scopes were tested for bacteria and fungus at the end of 12 weeks. No bacteria or fungus grew on any of the scopes. This study provides further support that contaminated endoscopes may be related to either inadequate disinfection or contamination during storage, not shelf life.

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.

Revision of Quality Indicators for the Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program of the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea

Gastroscopy and colonoscopy are widely used for the early diagnosis of stomach and colorectal cancer. The present revision integrates recent data regarding previous quality indicators and novel indicators suggested for gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures for the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea. The new indicators, developed by the Quality Improvement Committee of the Korean Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vary in the level of supporting evidence, and most are based solely on expert opinion. Updated indicators validated by clinical research were prioritized, but were chosen by expert consensus when such studies were absent. The resultant quality indicators were graded according to the levels of consensus and recommendations. The updated indicators will provide a relevant guideline for high-quality endoscopy. The future direction of quality indicator development should include relevant outcome measures and an evidence-based approach to support proposed performance targets.

Effectiveness of Reprocessing for Flexible Bronchoscopes and Endobronchial Ultrasound Bronchoscopes

BACKGROUND

Infections have been linked to inadequately reprocessed flexible bronchoscopes, and recent investigations determined that pathogen transmission occurred even when bronchoscope cleaning and disinfection practices aligned with current guidelines. This multisite, prospective study evaluated the effectiveness of real-world bronchoscope reprocessing methods, using a systematic approach.

METHODS

This study involved direct observation of reprocessing methods for flexible bronchoscopes, multifaceted evaluations performed after manual cleaning and after high-level disinfection, and assessments of storage conditions. Visual inspections of ports and channels were performed using lighted magnification and borescopes. Contamination was detected using microbial cultures and tests for protein, hemoglobin, and adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Researchers assessed reprocessing practices, and storage cabinet cleanliness was evaluated by visual inspection and ATP tests.

RESULTS

Researchers examined 24 clinically used bronchoscopes. After manual cleaning, 100% of bronchoscopes had residual contamination. Microbial growth was found in 14 fully reprocessed bronchoscopes (58%), including mold, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, and Escherichia coli/Shigella species. Visible irregularities were observed in 100% of bronchoscopes, including retained fluid; brown, red, or oily residue; scratches; damaged insertion tubes and distal ends; and filamentous debris in channels. Reprocessing practices were substandard at two of three sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Damaged and contaminated bronchoscopes were in use at all sites. Inadequate reprocessing practices may have contributed to bioburden found on bronchoscopes. However, even when guidelines were followed, high-level disinfection was not effective. A shift toward the use of sterilized bronchoscopes is recommended. In the meantime, quality management programs and updated reprocessing guidelines are needed.

[Revision of Quality Indicators for the Endoscopy Quality Improvement Program of the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea]

Gastroscopy and colonoscopy are widely used for the early diagnosis of stomach and colorectal cancer. The present revision integrates recent data regarding previous quality indicators and novel indicators suggested for gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures for the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea. The new indicators, developed by the Quality Improvement Committee of the Korean Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vary in the level of supporting evidence, and most are based solely on expert opinion. Updated indicators validated by clinical research were prioritized, but were chosen by expert consensus when such studies were absent. The resultant quality indicators were graded according to the levels of consensus and recommendations. The updated indicators will provide a relevant guideline for high-quality endoscopy. The future direction of quality indicator development should include relevant outcome measures and an evidence-based approach to support proposed performance targets.