Cargando…

Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection

AIM: To correlate the length of endoscope hang time and number of bacteria cultured prior to use. METHODS: Prospectively, we cultured specimens from 19 gastroscopes, 24 colonoscopes and 5 side viewing duodenoscopes during the period of 2011 to 2015. A total of 164 results had complete data denoting...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mallette, Katlin I, Pieroni, Peter, Dhalla, Sonny S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5769004/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29375742
http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v10.i1.51
_version_ 1783292817693474816
author Mallette, Katlin I
Pieroni, Peter
Dhalla, Sonny S
author_facet Mallette, Katlin I
Pieroni, Peter
Dhalla, Sonny S
author_sort Mallette, Katlin I
collection PubMed
description AIM: To correlate the length of endoscope hang time and number of bacteria cultured prior to use. METHODS: Prospectively, we cultured specimens from 19 gastroscopes, 24 colonoscopes and 5 side viewing duodenoscopes during the period of 2011 to 2015. A total of 164 results had complete data denoting date of cleansing, number of days stored and culture results. All scopes underwent initial cleaning in the endoscopy suite utilizing tap water, and then manually cleaned and flushed. High level disinfection was achieved with a Medivator(©) DSD (Medivator Inc., United States) automated endoscope reprocessor following manufacturer instructions, with Glutacide(®) (Pharmax Limited, Canada), a 2% glutaraldehyde solution. After disinfection, all scopes were stored in dust free, unfiltered commercial cabinets for up to 7 d. Prior to use, all scopes were sampled and plated on sheep blood agar for 48 h; the colony count was obtained from each plate. The length of endoscope hang time and bacterial load was analyzed utilizing unpaired t-tests. The overall percentage of positive and negative cultures for each type of endoscope was also calculated. RESULTS: All culture results were within the acceptable range (less than 200 cfu/mL). One colonoscope cultured 80 cfu/mL after hanging for 1 d, which was the highest count. ERCP scopes cultured at most 10 cfu, this occurred after 2 and 7 d, and gastroscopes cultured 50 cfu/mL at most, at 1 d. Most cultures were negative for growth, irrespective of the length of hang time. Furthermore, all scopes, with the exception of one colonoscope which had two positive cultures (each of 10 cfu/mL), had at most one positive culture. There was no significant difference in the number of bacteria cultured after 1 d compared to 7 d when all scopes were combined (day 2: P = 0.515; day 3: P = identical; day 4: P = 0.071; day 5: P = 0.470; day 6: P = 0.584; day 7: P = 0.575). There was also no significant difference in the number of bacteria cultured after 1 day compared to 7 d for gastroscopes (day 2: P = 0.895; day 3: P = identical; day 4: P = identical; day 5: P = 0.893; day 6: P = identical; day 7: P = 0.756), colonoscopes (day 2: P = 0.489; day 4: P = 0.493; day 5: P = 0.324; day 6: P = 0.526; day 7: P = identical), or ERCP scopes (day 2: P = identical; day 7: P = 0.685). CONCLUSION: There is no correlation between hang time and bacterial load. Endoscopes do not need to be reprocessed if reused within a period of 7 d.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5769004
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57690042018-01-27 Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection Mallette, Katlin I Pieroni, Peter Dhalla, Sonny S World J Gastrointest Endosc Prospective Study AIM: To correlate the length of endoscope hang time and number of bacteria cultured prior to use. METHODS: Prospectively, we cultured specimens from 19 gastroscopes, 24 colonoscopes and 5 side viewing duodenoscopes during the period of 2011 to 2015. A total of 164 results had complete data denoting date of cleansing, number of days stored and culture results. All scopes underwent initial cleaning in the endoscopy suite utilizing tap water, and then manually cleaned and flushed. High level disinfection was achieved with a Medivator(©) DSD (Medivator Inc., United States) automated endoscope reprocessor following manufacturer instructions, with Glutacide(®) (Pharmax Limited, Canada), a 2% glutaraldehyde solution. After disinfection, all scopes were stored in dust free, unfiltered commercial cabinets for up to 7 d. Prior to use, all scopes were sampled and plated on sheep blood agar for 48 h; the colony count was obtained from each plate. The length of endoscope hang time and bacterial load was analyzed utilizing unpaired t-tests. The overall percentage of positive and negative cultures for each type of endoscope was also calculated. RESULTS: All culture results were within the acceptable range (less than 200 cfu/mL). One colonoscope cultured 80 cfu/mL after hanging for 1 d, which was the highest count. ERCP scopes cultured at most 10 cfu, this occurred after 2 and 7 d, and gastroscopes cultured 50 cfu/mL at most, at 1 d. Most cultures were negative for growth, irrespective of the length of hang time. Furthermore, all scopes, with the exception of one colonoscope which had two positive cultures (each of 10 cfu/mL), had at most one positive culture. There was no significant difference in the number of bacteria cultured after 1 d compared to 7 d when all scopes were combined (day 2: P = 0.515; day 3: P = identical; day 4: P = 0.071; day 5: P = 0.470; day 6: P = 0.584; day 7: P = 0.575). There was also no significant difference in the number of bacteria cultured after 1 day compared to 7 d for gastroscopes (day 2: P = 0.895; day 3: P = identical; day 4: P = identical; day 5: P = 0.893; day 6: P = identical; day 7: P = 0.756), colonoscopes (day 2: P = 0.489; day 4: P = 0.493; day 5: P = 0.324; day 6: P = 0.526; day 7: P = identical), or ERCP scopes (day 2: P = identical; day 7: P = 0.685). CONCLUSION: There is no correlation between hang time and bacterial load. Endoscopes do not need to be reprocessed if reused within a period of 7 d. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2018-01-16 2018-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5769004/ /pubmed/29375742 http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v10.i1.51 Text en ©The Author(s) 2018. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Prospective Study
Mallette, Katlin I
Pieroni, Peter
Dhalla, Sonny S
Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection
title Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection
title_full Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection
title_fullStr Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection
title_full_unstemmed Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection
title_short Bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection
title_sort bacterial presence on flexible endoscopes vs time since disinfection
topic Prospective Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5769004/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29375742
http://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v10.i1.51
work_keys_str_mv AT mallettekatlini bacterialpresenceonflexibleendoscopesvstimesincedisinfection
AT pieronipeter bacterialpresenceonflexibleendoscopesvstimesincedisinfection
AT dhallasonnys bacterialpresenceonflexibleendoscopesvstimesincedisinfection