Cargando…
Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial
OBJECTIVE: Single-use duodenoscopes have been recently developed to eliminate risk of infection transmission from contaminated reusable duodenoscopes. We compared performances of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). DESIG...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8040157/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32895332 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321836 |
_version_ | 1783677730677587968 |
---|---|
author | Bang, Ji Young Hawes, Robert Varadarajulu, Shyam |
author_facet | Bang, Ji Young Hawes, Robert Varadarajulu, Shyam |
author_sort | Bang, Ji Young |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Single-use duodenoscopes have been recently developed to eliminate risk of infection transmission from contaminated reusable duodenoscopes. We compared performances of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). DESIGN: Patients with native papilla requiring ERCP were randomised to single-use or reusable duodenoscope. Primary outcome was comparing number of attempts to achieve successful cannulation of desired duct. Secondary outcomes were technical performance that measured duodenoscope manoeuvrability, mechanical-imaging characteristics and ability to perform therapeutic interventions, need for advanced cannulation techniques or cross-over to alternate duodenoscope group to achieve ductal access and adverse events. RESULTS: 98 patients were treated using single-use (n=48) or reusable (n=50) duodenoscopes with >80% graded as low-complexity procedures. While median number of attempts to achieve successful cannulation was significantly lower for single-use cohort (2 vs 5, p=0.013), ease of passage into stomach (p=0.047), image quality (p<0.001), image stability (p<0.001) and air–water button functionality (p<0.001) were significantly worse. There was no significant difference in rate of cannulation, adverse events including mortality (one patient in each group), need to cross-over or need for advanced cannulation techniques to achieve ductal access, between cohorts. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, only duodenoscope type (single-use) was associated with less than six attempts to achieve selective cannulation (p=0.012), when adjusted for patient demographics, procedural complexity and type of intervention. CONCLUSION: Given the overall safety profile and similar technical performance, single-use duodenoscopes represent an alternative to reusable duodenoscopes for performing low-complexity ERCP procedures in experienced hands. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT04143698 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8040157 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80401572021-04-26 Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial Bang, Ji Young Hawes, Robert Varadarajulu, Shyam Gut Endoscopy OBJECTIVE: Single-use duodenoscopes have been recently developed to eliminate risk of infection transmission from contaminated reusable duodenoscopes. We compared performances of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). DESIGN: Patients with native papilla requiring ERCP were randomised to single-use or reusable duodenoscope. Primary outcome was comparing number of attempts to achieve successful cannulation of desired duct. Secondary outcomes were technical performance that measured duodenoscope manoeuvrability, mechanical-imaging characteristics and ability to perform therapeutic interventions, need for advanced cannulation techniques or cross-over to alternate duodenoscope group to achieve ductal access and adverse events. RESULTS: 98 patients were treated using single-use (n=48) or reusable (n=50) duodenoscopes with >80% graded as low-complexity procedures. While median number of attempts to achieve successful cannulation was significantly lower for single-use cohort (2 vs 5, p=0.013), ease of passage into stomach (p=0.047), image quality (p<0.001), image stability (p<0.001) and air–water button functionality (p<0.001) were significantly worse. There was no significant difference in rate of cannulation, adverse events including mortality (one patient in each group), need to cross-over or need for advanced cannulation techniques to achieve ductal access, between cohorts. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, only duodenoscope type (single-use) was associated with less than six attempts to achieve selective cannulation (p=0.012), when adjusted for patient demographics, procedural complexity and type of intervention. CONCLUSION: Given the overall safety profile and similar technical performance, single-use duodenoscopes represent an alternative to reusable duodenoscopes for performing low-complexity ERCP procedures in experienced hands. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT04143698 BMJ Publishing Group 2021-05 2020-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8040157/ /pubmed/32895332 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321836 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article 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, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Endoscopy Bang, Ji Young Hawes, Robert Varadarajulu, Shyam Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial |
title | Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial |
title_full | Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial |
title_fullStr | Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial |
title_short | Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial |
title_sort | equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial |
topic | Endoscopy |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8040157/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32895332 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321836 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bangjiyoung equivalentperformanceofsingleuseandreusableduodenoscopesinarandomisedtrial AT hawesrobert equivalentperformanceofsingleuseandreusableduodenoscopesinarandomisedtrial AT varadarajulushyam equivalentperformanceofsingleuseandreusableduodenoscopesinarandomisedtrial |