nach oben

Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology

Erschienen in:

14.04.2022 | Endoscopy (P Siersema, Section Editor)

Prevention of Duodenoscope-Associated Infections

verfasst von: Andrew Ofosu, MD, MPH, Subhas Banerjee, MD

Erschienen in: Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Over the last decade, several outbreaks of transmission of infection have been linked to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, despite adherence to reprocessing protocols. This review evaluates enhanced reprocessing measures recommended by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as newly available duodenoscopes with disposable components and single-use duodenoscopes.

Recent Findings

Current data indicate that none of the FDA suggested enhancements in reprocessing completely eliminate duodenoscope culture positivity. Nevertheless, these enhancements may be beneficial, as evidenced by a decrease in reports of duodenoscope related infections and deaths over recent years. Initial microbiological data on disposable endcaps and on a distal duodenoscope barrier device are encouraging, as are functionality and safety data on disposable duodenoscopes.

Summary

More data on the efficacy, safety, and relative cost-effectiveness of duodenoscopes with disposable components and disposable duodenoscopes will help facilitate their adoption. In the interim transition period, endoscopy units should diligently follow manufacturer instructions for duodenoscope reprocessing and maintenance, pay attention to the human component of reprocessing, and adopt one or more enhanced reprocessing measures.

Nelson DB, Barkun AN, Block KP, Burdick JS, Ginsberg GG, Greenwald DA, et al. Transmission of infection by gastrointestional endoscopy: May 2001. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;54(6):824–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(01)70086-7.CrossRefPubMed

Kovaleva J, Peters FT, van der Mei HC, Degener JE. Transmission of infection by flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2013;26(2):231–54. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00085-12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ofstead CL, Dirlam Langlay AM, Mueller NJ, Tosh PK, Wetzler HP. Re-evaluating endoscopy-associated infection risk estimates and their implications. Am J Infect Control. 2013;41(8):734–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2012.10.008.CrossRefPubMed

Smith ZL, Oh YS, Saeian K, Edmiston CE Jr, Khan AH, Massey BT, et al. Transmission of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae during ERCP: time to revisit the current reprocessing guidelines. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81(4):1041–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2014.11.006.CrossRefPubMed

Wendorf KA, Kay M, Baliga C, Weissman SJ, Gluck M, Verma P, et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-associated AmpC Escherichia coli outbreak. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2015;36(6):634–42. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2015.66.CrossRefPubMed

Kola A, Piening B, Pape U-F, Veltzke-Schlieker W, Kaase M, Geffers C, et al. An outbreak of carbapenem-resistant OXA-48 – producing Klebsiella pneumonia associated to duodenoscopy. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015;4(1):8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-015-0049-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ofstead CL, Wetzler HP, Snyder AK, Horton RA. Endoscope reprocessing methods: a prospective study on the impact of human factors and automation. Gastroenterol Nurs. 2010;33(4):304–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/SGA.0b013e3181e9431a.CrossRefPubMed

FDA. Design of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) duodenoscopes may impede effective cleaning: FDA Safety Communication. https://www.fdanews.com/ext/resources/files/03-15/03-02-15-endoscopes.pdf?1424972528. Accessed 02/07/2021. 2015.

Rutala WA, Weber DJ. FDA labeling requirements for disinfection of endoscopes: a counterpoint. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1995;16(4):231–5. https://doi.org/10.1086/647095.CrossRefPubMed

10.

FDA. Supplemental measures to enhance duodenoscope reprocessing: FDA Safety Communication. https://www.fdanews.com/ext/resources/files/08-15/081015-duodenoscopes-fda.pdf?1520541508. Accessed February 7th 2021. 2015.

11.

FDA. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Infections associated with reprocessed duodenoscopes 2019.

12.

FDA. The FDA continues to remind facilities of the importance of following duodenoscope reprocessing instructions: FDA Safety Communication. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/safety-communications/fda-continues-remind-facilities-importance-following-duodenoscope-reprocessing-instructions-fda. Acessed 02/07/2021. 2019.

13.

FDA. The FDA is recommending transition to duodenoscopes with innovative designs to enhance safety: FDA Safety Communication. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/safety-communications/fda-recommending-transition-duodenoscopes-innovative-designs-enhance-safety-fda-safety-communication. Accessed 02/07/2021. 2020.

14.

Armellino D, Cifu K, Wallace M, Johnson S, DiCapua J, Dowling O, et al. Implementation of remote video auditing with feedback and compliance for manual-cleaning protocols of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography endoscopes. Am J Infect Control. 2018;46(5):594–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2017.10.007.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Funk SE, Reaven NL. High-level endoscope disinfection processes in emerging economies: financial impact of manual process versus automated endoscope reprocessing. J Hosp Infect. 2014;86(4):250–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2014.01.007.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Rex DK, Sieber M, Lehman GA, Webb D, Schmitt B, Kressel AB, et al. A double-reprocessing high-level disinfection protocol does not eliminate positive cultures from the elevators of duodenoscopes. Endoscopy. 2018;50(06):588–96.CrossRef

17.

FDA. Effective reprocessing of endoscopes used in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures. https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170113091347/http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/Gastroenterology-UrologyDevicesPanel/UCM446924.pdf. Accessed 02/04/2021.

18.

Sethi S, Huang RJ, Barakat MT, Banaei N, Friedland S, Banerjee S. Adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence for bacteriologic surveillance and reprocessing strategies for minimizing risk of infection transmission by duodenoscopes. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85(6):1180-7.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.10.035.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Ross AS, Baliga C, Verma P, Duchin J, Gluck M. A quarantine process for the resolution of duodenoscope-associated transmission of multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82(3):477–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2015.04.036.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Higa JT, Choe J, Tombs D, Gluck M, Ross AS. Optimizing duodenoscope reprocessing: rigorous assessment of a culture and quarantine protocol. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;88(2):223–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.02.015.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Mark JA, Underberg K, Kramer RE. Results of duodenoscope culture and quarantine after manufacturer-recommended cleaning process. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(6):1328–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.12.050.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Beilenhoff U, Biering H, Blum R, Brljak J, Cimbro M, Dumonceau J-M, et al. Prevention of multidrug-resistant infections from contaminated duodenoscopes: position statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and European Society of Gastroenterology Nurses and Associates (ESGENA). Endoscopy. 2017;49(11):1098–106.CrossRef

23.

Epstein L, Hunter JC, Arwady MA, Tsai V, Stein L, Gribogiannis M, et al. New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase–producing carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli associated with exposure to duodenoscopes. JAMA. 2014;312(14):1447–55. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.12720.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Snyder GM, Wright SB, Smithey A, Mizrahi M, Sheppard M, Hirsch EB, et al. Randomized comparison of 3 high-level disinfection and sterilization procedures for duodenoscopes. Gastroenterology. 2017;153(4):1018–25. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2017.06.052.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Almario CV, May FP, Shaheen NJ, Murthy R, Gupta K, Jamil LH, et al. Cost utility of competing strategies to prevent endoscopic transmission of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Official journal of the American College of Gastroenterology | ACG. 2015;110(12):1666–74. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2015.358.

26.

Smith ZL, Dua A, Saeian K, Ledeboer NA, Graham MB, Aburajab M, et al. A novel protocol obviates endoscope sampling for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: experience of a center with a prior outbreak. Dig Dis Sci. 2017;62(11):3100–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-017-4669-9.CrossRefPubMed

27.

McDonnell G, Ehrman M, Kiess S. Effectiveness of the SYSTEM 1E liquid chemical sterilant processing system for reprocessing duodenoscopes. Am J Infect Control. 2016;44(6):685–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2016.01.008.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Gromski MA, Sieber MS, Sherman S, Rex DK. Double high-level disinfection versus liquid chemical sterilization for reprocessing of duodenoscopes used for ERCP: a prospective randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.07.057.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Thaker AM, Muthusamy VR, Sedarat A, Watson RR, Kochman ML, Ross AS, et al. Duodenoscope reprocessing practice patterns in U.S. endoscopy centers: a survey study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;88(2):316–22.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.04.2340.

30.

Bartles RL, Leggett JE, Hove S, Kashork CD, Wang L, Oethinger M, et al. A randomized trial of single versus double high-level disinfection of duodenoscopes and linear echoendoscopes using standard automated reprocessing. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;88(2):306-13.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.02.016.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Alfa MJ, Sitter DL. In-hospital evaluation of contamination of duodenoscopes: a quantitative assessment of the effect of drying. J Hosp Infect. 1991;19(2):89–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/0195-6701(91)90101-d.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Kovaleva J. Endoscope drying and its pitfalls. J Hosp Infect. 2017;97(4):319–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2017.07.012.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Ofstead CL, Heymann OL, Quick MR, Eiland JE, Wetzler HP. Residual moisture and waterborne pathogens inside flexible endoscopes: evidence from a multisite study of endoscope drying effectiveness. Am J Infect Control. 2018;46(6):689–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2018.03.002.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Barakat MT, Girotra M, Huang RJ, Banerjee S. Scoping the scope: endoscopic evaluation of endoscope working channels with a new high-resolution inspection endoscope (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;88(4):601–11 e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.01.018.

35.

Thaker AM, Kim S, Sedarat A, Watson RR, Muthusamy VR. Inspection of endoscope instrument channels after reprocessing using a prototype borescope. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;88(4):612–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.04.2366.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Barakat MT, Huang RJ, Banerjee S. Comparison of automated and manual drying in the elimination of residual endoscope working channel fluid after reprocessing (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2019;89(1):124-32.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2018.08.033.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Day LW, Muthusamy VR, Collins J, Kushnir VM, Sawhney MS, Thosani NC, et al. Multisociety guideline on reprocessing flexible GI endoscopes and accessories. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;93(1):11-33.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.09.048.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Perumpail RB, Marya NB, McGinty BL, Muthusamy VR. Endoscope reprocessing: comparison of drying effectiveness and microbial levels with an automated drying and storage cabinet with forced filtered air and a standard storage cabinet. Am J Infect Control. 2019;47(9):1083–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2019.02.016.CrossRefPubMed

39.

FDA. FDA clears first duodenoscope with disposable endcap. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-clears-first-duodenoscope-disposable-distal-cap. Accessed 02/06/2021. 2017.

40.

FUJIFILM. United States Food and Drug Administration: FUJIFILM duodenoscope model ED-580XT.2019. 2019.

41.

Olympus. Olympus announces FDA clearance of the TJF-Q190V Duodenoscope. https://medical.olympusamerica.com/articles/olympus-announces-fda-clearance-tjf-q190v-duodenoscope. 2020.

42.

Ridtitid W, Pakvisal P, Chatsuwan T, Kerr SJ, Tiankanon K, Piyachaturawat P, et al. A newly designed duodenoscope with detachable distal cap significantly reduces organic residue contamination after reprocessing. Endoscopy. 2020;52(9):754–60. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1145-3562.

43.

Pentax. DEC TM HD Duodenoscope. https://www.pentaxmedical.com/pentax/en/99/1/DEC-HD-Duodenoscope. Accessed 07/02/2021.

44.

Pasricha PJ, Miller S, Carter F, Humphries R. Novel and effective disposable device that provides 2-way protection to the duodenoscope from microbial contamination. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;92(1):199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.03.001.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Hutfless SM, Kalloo AN. Commentary on the 2016 Multi-Society Task Force Endoscope Reprocessing Guidelines. Gastroenterology. 2017;152(3):494–6. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2016.12.030.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Ross AS, Bruno MJ, Kozarek RA, Petersen BT, Pleskow DK, Sejpal DV, et al. Novel single-use duodenoscope compared with 3 models of reusable duodenoscopes for ERCP: a randomized bench-model comparison. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(2):396–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.08.032.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Muthusamy VR, Bruno MJ, Kozarek RA, Petersen BT, Pleskow DK, Sejpal DV, et al. Clinical evaluation of a single-use duodenoscope for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;18(9):2108-17.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.10.052.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Bang JY, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. Equivalent performance of single-use and reusable duodenoscopes in a randomised trial. Gut. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321836.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Lenzen M, Malik A, Li M, Fry J, Weisz H, Pichler PP, et al. The environmental footprint of health care: a global assessment. Lancet Planet Health. 2020;4(7):e271–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30121-2.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Vaccari M, Tudor T, Perteghella A. Costs associated with the management of waste from healthcare facilities: an analysis at national and site level. Waste Manag Res. 2018;36(1):39–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X17739968.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Namburar S, von Renteln D, Damianos J, Bradish L, Barrett J, Aguilera-Fish A, et al. Estimating the environmental impact of disposable endoscopic equipment and endoscopes. Gut. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-324729.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Hernandez LV, Le NNT, Patnode C, SIddiqui O, Jolliet O. ID: 3526786. Comparing the impact of reusable and single-use duodenoscopes using life cycle assessment. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;93:AB29.

53.

Bang JY, Sutton B, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. Concept of disposable duodenoscope: at what cost? Gut. 2019;68(11):1915. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-318227.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Barakat MT, Ghosh S, Banerjee S. Cost utility analysis of strategies for minimizing risk of duodenoscope related infections. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022;In press.

55.

Ambu. Introducing the Ambu aScope Duodeno. https://www.ambuusa.com/single-use-duodenoscope?gclid=Cj0KCQiAvP6ABhCjARIsAH37rbT3S2hfJMSr2rjjHA9tWuRbB_zkWKkqlnpgaanp5Sk8k8aSne3WloIaAirREALw_wcB. Accessed 02/06/2021.

56.

Sci B. CMS transitional pass-through (TPT) payment category. https://www.bostonscientific.com/en-US/medical-specialties/gastroenterology/exalt/exalt-transitional-pass-through-payment.html. Accessed 02/06/2021.

57.

Scientific B. CMS grants additional reimbursement for EXALT TM Model D single-use duodenoscope. https://newsbostonscientificcom/2021-08-02-CMS-Grants-Additional-Reimbursement-For-EXALT-TM-Model-D-Single-Use-Duodenoscope.

58.

Gromski MA, Sherman S. Technological review: developments in innovative duodenoscopes. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;In press.

59.

Petersen BT. Duodenoscope reprocessing: risk and options coming into view. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82(3):484–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2015.07.004.CrossRefPubMed

60.

FDA. Reducing the risk of infection from reprocessed duodenoscopes. https://www.fda.gov/media/132187/download. 2019.

Titel: Prevention of Duodenoscope-Associated Infections
verfasst von: Andrew Ofosu, MD, MPH
Subhas Banerjee, MD
Publikationsdatum: 14.04.2022
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1092-8472
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-309X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-022-00378-x

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Prevention of Duodenoscope-Associated Infections

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Erhebliches Risiko für Kehlkopfkrebs bei mäßiger Dysplasie

Nach Herzinfarkt mit Typ-1-Diabetes schlechtere Karten als mit Typ 2?

15% bedauern gewählte Blasenkrebs-Therapie

Costims – das nächste heiße Ding in der Krebstherapie?

Update Innere Medizin

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

The Impact of Social Workers in Cirrhosis Care: a Systematic Review

Pre-transplant Cardiovascular Risk Assessment and Modification

Symptom Management in Patients with Cirrhosis: a Practical Guide

Incidental Young-Onset Adenomas: Sporadic Findings or Harbingers of Increased Colon Cancer Risk?

POEM for Achalasia and Esophageal Motility Diseases: What Are the Knowledge Gaps?

Endoscopic Bariatric Procedures and the Elderly

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Erhebliches Risiko für Kehlkopfkrebs bei mäßiger Dysplasie

Nach Herzinfarkt mit Typ-1-Diabetes schlechtere Karten als mit Typ 2?

15% bedauern gewählte Blasenkrebs-Therapie

Costims – das nächste heiße Ding in der Krebstherapie?

Update Innere Medizin