Disinfection of otorhinolaryngological endoscopes with electrolyzed acid water: A cross-sectional and multicenter study.

Glutaraldehyde, a germicide for reprocessing endoscopes that is important for hygiene in the clinic, might be hazardous to humans. Electrolyzed acid water (EAW) has a broad anti-microbial spectrum and safety profile and might be a glutaraldehyde alternative. We sought to assess EAW disinfection of flexible endoscopes in clinical otorhinolaryngological settings and its in vitro inactivation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and bacteria commonly isolated in otorhinolaryngology. Ninety endoscopes were tested for bacterial contamination before and after endoscope disinfection with EAW. The species and strains of bacteria were studied. The in vitro inactivation of bacteria and SARS-CoV-2 by EAW was investigated to determine the efficacy of endoscope disinfection. More than 20 colony-forming units of bacteria at one or more sampling sites were detected in 75/90 microbiological cultures of samples from clinically used endoscopes (83.3%). The most common genus detected was Staphylococcus followed by Cutibacterium and Corynebacterium at all sites including the ears, noses, and throats. In the in vitro study, more than 107 CFU/mL of all bacterial species examined were reduced to below the detection limit (<10 CFU/mL) within 30 s after contact with EAW. When SARS-CoV-2 was treated with a 99-fold volume of EAW, the initial viral titer (> 105 PFU) was decreased to less than 5 PFU. Effective inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 was also observed with a 19:1 ratio of EAW to the virus. EAW effectively reprocessed flexible endoscopes contributing to infection control in medical institutions in the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

High Prevalence Rate of Microbial Contamination in Patient-Ready Gastrointestinal Endoscopes in Tehran, Iran: an Alarming Sign for the Occurrence of Severe Outbreaks.

An alarmingly increasing number of outbreaks caused by contaminated gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopes are being reported as a particularly concerning issue. This study is the first large-scale multicenter survey to evaluate the contamination of GI endoscopes in Tehran, Iran. This multicenter study was conducted among 15 tertiary referral and specialized gastrointestinal settings. Reprocessed GI endoscopes were sampled by the sequence of the flush-brush-flush method. Bacterial and viral contamination, as well as antimicrobial resistance, were explored by culture and molecular assays. A total of 133 reprocessed and ready-to-use GI endoscopes were investigated. In phase I and phase II, 47% and 32%, respectively, of the GI endoscopes were determined to be contaminated. GI flora was the most prevalent contaminant isolated from GI endoscopes, in which the most predominant bacteria were Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Klebsiella pneumoniae, in both phase I and II evaluations. The majority of the isolated bacteria in the current study were considered multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). More importantly, we recovered carbapenem-resistant nonfermentative Gram-negative bacilli (CRNFGNB), carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales (ESBL-E), multidrug-resistant Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), and drug-resistant Candida spp. Disconcertingly, our molecular assays revealed contamination of some reprocessed GI endoscopes with hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and even HIV. This multicenter study indicates a higher-than-expected contamination rate among reprocessed and ready-for-patient-use GI endoscopes, which suggests a higher-than-expected endoscopy-associated infection (EAI) risk, and potentially, morbidity and mortality rate, associated with endoscopy procedures in Tehran, Iran. IMPORTANCE In the light of severe outbreaks caused by multidrug-resistant microorganisms due to contaminated GI endoscopes, understanding to what extent GI endoscopes are inadequately reprocessed is crucial. Several studies assessed contamination of GI endoscopes with various outcomes across the world; however, the prevalence and risk factors of contaminated GI endoscopes and potential subsequent nosocomial spread are still unknown in Iran. The present study is the first large-scale multicenter survey to evaluate the microbial contamination of repossessed and ready-to-use GI endoscopes in Tehran, Iran. Our study showed a higher-than-expected contamination rate among reprocessed GI endoscopes, which suggests potential seeding of deadly but preventable outbreaks associated with endoscopy procedures in Iran. These results suggest that the current reprocessing and process control guidelines do not suffice in Iran. The current study is of particular importance and could provide insights into unrecognized and unidentified endoscopy-associated outbreaks in Iran.

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.

[Reducing Abnormal Culture Rates of Digestive Endoscopy in a Health Management Center].

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic evaluation plays an indispensable role in medical treatments designed to prevent, diagnose, and cure gastrointestinal disease. Surveillance culture monitoring may be useful in monitoring the outcome of reprocessing. PURPOSE: In this project, microbiologic surveillance cultures were employed to improve the quality of flexible endoscope disinfection. RESOLUTION: This project, implemented from February 1st, 2018 to February 28th, 2019, used several approaches to improve the positive culture rate. We redesigned and implemented the standard operating procedures for endoscope reprocessing, established an in-service training course, provided education materials on reprocessing, and installed a storage cabinet that custom-built to accommodate the endoscope. RESULTS: The positive culture rate was reduced from 5.8% to 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopy culturing is a useful method to assess the effectiveness of standard reprocessing procedures. The development of guidelines and skill practices should follow current, evidence-based practice and infection prevention principles, and related documents should be organized. We suggest regularly deploying quality-improvement techniques to improve performance and service delivery.

The Endoscopy Patient as a Vector and Victim.

Patient and procedural factors can increase the risk of infectious adverse events during endoscopy. Prophylactic antibiotic use must be judicious and individualized in the era of antibiotic resistance. New and emerging procedures require high-quality studies to elucidate appropriate risk profiles.

Nosocomial outbreak linked to a flexible gastrointestinal endoscope contaminated with an amikacin-resistant ST17 clone of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Endoscope contamination is infrequent but can be the source of nosocomial infections and outbreaks. In August 2016, an unexpected increase in the incidence of amikacin-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates (AK-Pae) was observed at a tertiary care center in the south of Spain. An epidemiological and microbiological investigation (August-October 2016) was performed to explain this finding. Isolates from clinical and environmental samples (2 endoscopes used for retrograde cholangiopancreatography; ERCP) were identified by MALDI-TOF. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the MicroScan system. Whole-Genome-Sequencing (Miseq, Illumina) was performed to determine the resistome and virulome. Clonal relatedness among isolates was assessed by SpeI-PFGE and MLST. A Caenorhabditis elegans killing assay was performed for virulence testing. Biofilm formation was performed using a colorimetric assay. Four of the 5 patients infected and/or colonized with AK-Pae in August 2016 had undergone ERCP ≤5 days before sample collection. Two endoscopes were contaminated with AK-Pae. Isolates from one endoscope showed an identical PFGE pattern to 9 isolates (cluster I) and differed (1-2 bands) to 5 isolates (cluster II). Isolates from these clusters belonged to the ST17 clone. This S17 clone was characterized by its low virulence in the C. elegans killing assay, and its biofilm-forming ability, slightly superior to that of high-risk clones of P. aeruginosa ST175 and ST235. This outbreak was caused by an endoscope used for ERCP contaminated with an invasive, moderately virulent, biofilm-forming AK-Pae ST17 clone, suggesting the possible emergence of a new high-risk lineage of this clone.

Detection of microbial contamination in dialysis water and gastrointestinal endoscopes by the Uro4 HB&L™ system.

Patients undergoing haemodialysis are exposed to a great volume of dialysis water and therefore its microbial analysis is important for patient safety. Furthermore, microbial surveillance is reported in several guidelines as a necessary means to identify contamination of gastrointestinal endoscopes in order to reduce the potential of infection risk. Here we evaluated the Uro4 HB&L™ automated system to detect microbial contamination in dialysis water and gastrointestinal endoscopes. A total of 222 samples were collected during a six month period. Dialysis water and gastrointestinal endoscopes were evaluated both with the reference culture methods and the Uro4 HB<M system. Bacterial identification was performed using a matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS). The results show that the Uro4 HB<M system has high specificity but a lesser sensitivity than traditional culture method, even if it might allow the identification of more exigent bacteria in terms of nutrition. The Uro4 HB<M system gives positive results in less time than culture method but the possibility to generate false negative results imposes that it should be associated with a traditional 48h agar culture.

Impact of wet storage and other factors on biofilm formation and contamination of patient-ready endoscopes: a narrative review.

The 2019 U.S. Food and Drug Administration report indicates that the clinical studies undertaken by the 3 main GI endoscope manufacturers demonstrate 5.4% of patient-ready duodenoscopes remain culture positive for high-concern organisms. The root causes of this persistent contamination are poorly understood. The objectives of this review include summarizing (1) the impact of inadequate manual cleaning and inadequate drying during storage on the formation of build-up biofilm in endoscope channels, (2) the impact of defoaming agents used during patient procedures on drying efficacy, (3) the data showing the importance of build-up biofilm on persistent microbial survival, and (4) the potential impact of implementation of a quality systems approach in GI endoscopy reprocessing.

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.

Comparative Study of Microbiological Monitoring Results from Three Types of Sampling Methods after Gastrointestinal Endoscope Reprocessing.

OBJECTIVE: Compare the effects of three sampling methods on the microbiological monitoring results after reprocessing of gastrointestinal endoscopes, providing scientific basis for improving the monitoring quality of gastrointestinal endoscope cleaning and disinfection. METHOD: Gastrointestinal endoscopes after reprocessing were selected randomly at the gastrointestinal endoscopy center of a tertiary hospital in Shanghai from October 2018 to February 2019. The endoscopes selected were all sampled in three different methods under continuous sampling and intermittent sampling respectively. Methods used includes, the biopsy channel group (Group A), the entire channel group (Group B), and the disc brush group (Group C). Then the colony forming units (CFU/piece) were counted in the laboratory. RESULTS: A total of 12 endoscopes were sampled by using continuous sampling approach, in which the detection rate of bacteria in disc brush group (33.3%) and entire channel group (33.3%) was higher than biopsy channel group (8.3%). Among the 12 endoscopes sampled with intermittent approach, the detection rate of bacteria from high to low was the disc brush group (50%), the entire channel group (41.7%), and the biopsy channel group (8.3%). CONCLUSION: Different sampling methods will lead to the difference of microbiological culture results after reprocessing of gastrointestinal endoscope, indicating that the improved sampling method is beneficial to objectively reflect the endoscope cleaning and disinfection effect, and improve the monitoring quality of endoscope disinfection.

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.

Efficacy of low-temperature plasma-activated gas disinfection against biofilm on contaminated GI endoscope channels.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: It has been increasingly recognized that the safety of GI endoscopes needs to be improved by addressing the small margin of safety of high-level disinfectants (HLDs) and the failure of HLDs to clear multidrug-resistant organisms and biofilms. There is also an unmet need for effective low-temperature sterilization techniques that have a clear pathway for U.S. Food and Drug Administration clearance. Here, we report the results of our investigation of a novel argon plasma-activated gas (PAG) for disinfection and potentially sterilization of biofilm-contaminated endoscopic channels. METHODS: Test polytetrafluoroethylene channel segments were contaminated with 4-, 24- and 48-hour luminal biofilms of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, or Escherichia coli and were treated by PAG flowing for up to 9 minutes. After PAG treatment, inactivation and dispersal of luminal bacterial biofilms and their regrowth in 48 hours were evaluated. Reactive species induced by PAG were measured with colorimetric probes and electron spin resonance spectrometry. Surface morphology and elemental composition of PAG-treated channel material were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: PAG treatment for 9 minutes led to more than 8 log reduction of viable cells and dispersal of 24- and 48-hour luminal biofilms of all 3 bacteria and to suppression of their regrowth, whereas it resulted in little morphologic abnormalities in channel material. Ozone concentration of PAG fell to below .01 ppm within 30 seconds of switching off the plasma. PAG-treated deionized water was acidified with numerous types of reactive species, each with a concentration some 3 orders of magnitude or more below its bacterial inhibition concentration. CONCLUSIONS: PAG is capable of effectively and rapidly disinfecting luminal bacterial biofilms and offers an alternative to the step of HLDs and/or ethylene oxide in the endoscope reprocessing procedure with safety to personnel and environment.

Comparison of automated and manual drying in the elimination of residual endoscope working channel fluid after reprocessing (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Residual fluid within endoscope working channels after reprocessing may promote growth of pathogens. Current reprocessing guidelines therefore recommend endoscope drying with administration of forced filtered air; however, the duration and modality of administered air are not specified. The new DriScope Aid device enables automated administration of filtered air at controlled pressure through all internal endoscope channels. We systematically compared, for the first time, the impact of manual drying and automated drying on retained working channel fluid and bioburden after reprocessing. METHODS: We assessed for residual working channel fluid after reprocessing and/or drying by using the SteriCam borescope. Drying was performed either manually (forced filtered air) or was automated (DriScope Aid) for either 5 or 10 minutes. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence testing was performed on working channel rinsates after drying, to evaluate for residual bioburden. RESULTS: Significantly more fluid droplets were evident after manual drying (4.55 ± 6.14) than with automated device-facilitated drying for either 5 minutes (0.83 ± 1.29; P = .007) or 10 minutes (0 ± 0; P = .001). ATP bioluminescence values were higher for manual drying compared with automated drying at 48 hours (P = .001) and 72 hours (P = .014) after reprocessing. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate significantly fewer water droplets and delayed ATP bioluminescence values within endoscope working channels after automated drying compared with manual drying. In particular, virtually no retained fluid was evident within endoscope working channels after automated drying for 10 minutes. These findings support recommendations for automation of as many reprocessing steps as possible. Automated drying may decrease the risk of transmission of infection related to endoscopy.

Procedures in endoscope reprocessing and monitoring: an Italian survey.

BACKGROUND: The high diffusion of endoscopes worldwide and the need for effective reprocessing methods requested the development of guidelines and implementation of surveillance procedures at local level. STUDY DESIGN: In order to collect data on everyday's practice and adherence to available guidelines, endoscopy units from different public institutions were surveyed using a dedicated questionnaire. METHODS: Between July and November 2015 a survey was carried in 12 main hospitals from 10 different Italian regions, involving 22 endoscopy units. The state of the art of national and international guidelines was investigated to compare the protocols adopted at local level. RESULTS: In all the surveyed hospitals, the reprocessing activity is based on pre-established protocols in adherence with principal guidelines. Enzymatic detergents, which are recommended by the international guidelines, are used in 55.6% of units and peracetic acid is currently the most widely used chemical disinfectant. Discrepancies were observed in the application of periodic quality controls. CONCLUSION: Updated guidelines are generally applied in reprocessing practice. Quality controls may represent a critical issue to improve effectiveness and surveillance. The whole of acquired data can promote a positive trend towards the application of best practices.

New Developments in the Prevention of Gastrointestinal Scope-Related Infections.

Gastrointestinal endoscopes are used for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes and are the most common medical device implicated in health care-associated outbreaks. Infections can be divided into endogenous or exogenous. Exogenous infections were associated with lapses in reprocessing. Recent outbreaks have occurred despite compliance with reprocessing guidelines and highlight the challenges with clearance of all organisms from the duodenoscopes and the potential role of biofilms in hindering adequate reprocessing. This review provides an overview of recent developments and the current understanding of the key contributing factors related to gastrointestinal endoscope-related infections and current approaches to identify and prevent these complications.

Efficacy of Peracetic Acid (EndoPA®) for Disinfection of Endoscopes.

Background/Aims: We aimed to investigate the efficacy of peracetic acid (EndoPA® Firson Co., Ltd., Cheonan, Korea) in disinfecting endoscopes. Methods: We prospectively investigated the gastroscopes (Part I) utilized in 100 gastroscopic examinations and colonoscopes (Part II) utilized in 30 colonoscopic examinations after disinfecting them with 0.2% peracetic acid (EndoPA® Firson Co., Ltd.). These instruments had been collected consecutively throughout the study period. We reprocessed and disinfected the endoscopes according to the guidelines for cleaning and disinfecting gastrointestinal endoscopes laid down by the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in 2017. Three culture samples were obtained from each examination, based on different sampling methods. The primary outcome was a positive culture rate. Results: In Part I of our study, two of 300 samples were positive. The culture positive rate after disinfection was 0.7% (2/300). The culture positive rate was not significantly different based on the exposure time to EndoPA® or the age of the scopes (p=0.7 or 0.2, respectively). In Part II of our study, all samples (n=90) were negative. Conclusions: We conclude that 0.2% peracetic acid (EndoPA®) appears to be a good disinfectant for both gastroscopes and colonoscopes.

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.

High-quality endoscope reprocessing decreases endoscope contamination.

OBJECTIVES: Several outbreaks of severe infections due to contamination of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopes, mainly duodenoscopes, have been described. The rate of microbial endoscope contamination varies dramatically in literature. The aim of this multicentre prospective study was to evaluate the hygiene quality of endoscopes and automated endoscope reprocessors (AERs) in Tyrol/Austria. METHODS: In 2015 and 2016, a total of 463 GI endoscopes and 105 AERs from 29 endoscopy centres were analysed by a routine (R) and a combined routine and advanced (CRA) sampling procedure and investigated for microbial contamination by culture-based and molecular-based analyses. RESULTS: The contamination rate of GI endoscopes was 1.3%-4.6% according to the national guideline, suggesting that 1.3-4.6 patients out of 100 could have had contacts with hygiene-relevant microorganisms through an endoscopic intervention. Comparison of R and CRA sampling showed 1.8% of R versus 4.6% of CRA failing the acceptance criteria in phase I and 1.3% of R versus 3.0% of CRA samples failing in phase II. The most commonly identified indicator organism was Pseudomonas spp., mainly Pseudomonas oleovorans. None of the tested viruses were detected in 40 samples. While AERs in phase I failed (n = 9, 17.6%) mainly due to technical faults, phase II revealed lapses (n = 6, 11.5%) only on account of microbial contamination of the last rinsing water, mainly with Pseudomonas spp. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study the contamination rate of endoscopes was low compared with results from other European countries, possibly due to the high quality of endoscope reprocessing, drying and storage.

Implementation of a systematic culturing program to monitor the efficacy of endoscope reprocessing: outcomes and costs.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued guidance for duodenoscope culturing and reprocessing in response to outbreaks of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) duodenoscope-related infections. Based on this guidance, we implemented best practices for reprocessing and developed a systematic process for culturing endoscopes with elevator levers. The aim of this study is to report the outcomes and direct costs of this program. METHODS: First, clinical microbiology data from 2011 to 2014 were reviewed retrospectively to assess for possible elevator lever-equipped endoscope-related CRE infections. Second, a program to systematically culture elevator lever-equipped endoscopes was implemented. Each week, about 25% of the inventory of elevator lever-equipped endoscopes is cultured based on the CDC guidelines. If any cultures return bacterial growth, the endoscope is quarantined pending repeat culturing. The costs of the program, including staff time and supplies, have been calculated. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2014, none of 17 patients with documented CRE infection had undergone ERCP or endoscopic ultrasound in the previous 36 months. From June 2015 to September 2016, 285 cultures were performed. Three (1.1%) had bacterial growth, 2 with skin contaminants and 1 with an oral contaminant. The associated endoscopes were quarantined and reprocessed, and repeat cultures were negative. The total estimated cost of our program for an inventory of 20 elevator lever-equipped endoscopes was $30,429.60 per year ($1521.48 per endoscope). CONCLUSIONS: This 16-month evaluation of a systematic endoscope culturing program identified a low rate of positive cultures after elevator lever endoscope reprocessing. All positive cultures were with non-enteric microorganisms. The program was of modest cost and identified reprocessing procedures that may have led to a low rate of positive cultures.

Reprocessing practices for gastrointestinal endoscopes: a multicentre study in Egyptian university hospitals.

The aim of this study was to assess the practices of health care workers during gasterointestinal endoscope reprocessing, evaluate their knowledge about reprocessing, and verify their compliance with laboratory and microbiological tests in endoscopy units at Zagazig University and Fayoum University hospitals. All nursing staff on duty from 10 endoscopy units, with 16 flexible endoscopes, were included. Knowledge and practice were assessed by a questionnaire and a checklist. The mean knowledge score was 7.5 (SD 1.9), which was poor. Compliance was 90% for disinfection and 74% for endoscope processing after disinfection. Before reuse after cleaning, no organisms were detected in 5 endoscopes, while 8 colony forming units were found in 2. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most common organism isolated. Strict implementation of the reprocessing guidelines are needed, especially the pre-cleaning stage and leak testing. Repeating high level disinfection after storage and before use must be followed.