Summary of guidelines for infection prevention and control for flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: High-quality processes to ensure infection prevention and control in the delivery of safe endoscopy services are essential. In 2010, the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) developed a Canadian guideline for the reprocessing of flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy equipment. METHODS: The CAG Endoscopy Committee carefully reviewed the 2010 guidelines and prepared an executive summary. RESULTS: Key elements relevant to infection prevention and control for flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy were highlighted for each of the recommendations included in the 2010 document. The 2010 guidelines consist of seven sections, including administrative recommendations, as well as recommendations for endoscopy and endoscopy decontamination equipment, reprocessing endoscopes and accessories, endoscopy unit design, quality management, outbreak investigation and management, and classic and variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease. DISCUSSION: The recommendations for infection prevention and control for flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy are intended for all individuals with responsibility for endoscopes in all settings where endoscopy is performed.

Prospective analysis of fluoroscopy duration during ERCP: critical determinants.

BACKGROUND: Fluoroscopy during ERCP has a linear relationship with radiation, carrying risk of exposure. OBJECTIVE: To determine patient, physician, and procedural factors affecting fluoroscopy duration. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of ERCPs with evaluation of patient, physician, and procedural variables. SETTING: Two tertiary-care hospitals. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing ERCP. INTERVENTIONS: ERCP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Variables associated with prolonged fluoroscopy duration. RESULTS: Mean fluoroscopy time (388 ERCPs) was 6.77 minutes (95% CI, 6.15-7.39). No patient factors were found to significantly affect fluoroscopy duration. Fluoroscopy duration was significantly lower for 2 endoscopists compared with the reference endoscopist (average of 4.16 minutes less; 95% CI, -5.48 to -2.48). Multivariable analysis identified variables associated with longer fluoroscopy duration; stent insertion (+3.11 minutes; 95% CI, 1.91-4.30), lithotripsy (+5.74 minutes; 95% CI, 0.931-10.5), needle-knife sphincterotomy (+4.44 minutes; 95% CI, 2.20-6.67), biopsies (+2.11 minutes; 95% CI, 0.025-4.18), use of a guidewire (+1.55 minutes; 95% CI, 0.025-3.07), additional guidewires (+5.61 minutes; 95% CI, 2.69-8.51), and balloon catheter (+4.27 minutes; 95% CI, 3.00-5.53). Mean fluoroscopy duration when a gastroenterology fellow was involved (n = 318) was 7.05 minutes (95% CI, 6.35-7.76) compared with 5.44 minutes (95% CI, 4.26-6.63) when no fellow present (n = 70) (P < .0451). LIMITATIONS: Only 2 centers; others may have different results. Not blinded; investigators may change their practice because fluoroscopy was duration studied. Irrelevance of measuring fluoroscopy duration because endoscopists using protection may not have increased radiation exposure. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective analysis, factors associated with fluoroscopy duration included endoscopists; stent insertion; lithotripsy; biopsies; use of a needle-knife, guidewire, and balloon catheter; and involvement of a gastroenterology fellow. These identified variables may help endoscopists predict which procedures are associated with prolonged fluoroscopy duration and may lead to appropriate precautions.