ESGE-ESGENA guideline for quality assurance in reprocessing: Microbiological surveillance testing in endoscopy

Beilenhoff, Ulrike; Neumann, Christiane; Rey, Jean‐François; Biering, Holger; Blum, Reinhard; Schmidt, Verona

doi:10.1055/s-2006-945181

Cited by 169 publications

(159 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

134

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A consensus guideline from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) addresses the need for microbiological surveillance in endoscopy (5). Recommendations from several countries a The mean logarithmic counts in control samples (n ϭ 3) for biofilm Ϯ the standard deviation (log 10 CFU/cm 2 ) for Letheen broth, saline solution, and sterile water were 8.20 Ϯ 0.06, 8.71 Ϯ 0.28, and 7.64 Ϯ 0.21, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment on Experimental Bacterial Biofilms and in Clinical Practice of the Efficacy of Sampling Solutions for Microbiological Testing of Endoscopes

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opinions differ on the value of microbiological testing of endoscopes, which varies according to the technique used. We compared the efficacy on bacterial biofilms of sampling solutions used for the surveillance of the contamination of endoscope channels. To compare efficacy, we used an experimental model of a 48-h Pseudomonas biofilm grown on endoscope internal tubing. Sampling of this experimental biofilm was performed with a Tween 80-lecithin-based solution, saline, and sterile water. We also performed a randomized prospective study during routine clinical practice in our hospital sampling randomly with two different solutions the endoscopes after reprocessing. Biofilm recovery expressed as a logarithmic ratio of bacteria recovered on bacteria initially present in biofilm was significantly more effective with the Tween 80-lecithin-based solution than with saline solution (P ‫؍‬ 0.002) and sterile water (P ‫؍‬ 0.002). There was no significant difference between saline and sterile water. In the randomized clinical study, the rates of endoscopes that were contaminated with the Tween 80-lecithin-based sampling solution and the saline were 8/25 and 1/25, respectively (P ‫؍‬ 0.02), and the mean numbers of bacteria recovered were 281 and 19 CFU/100 ml (P ‫؍‬ 0.001), respectively. In conclusion, the efficiency and therefore the value of the monitoring of endoscope reprocessing by microbiological cultures is dependent on the sampling solutions used. A sampling solution with a tensioactive action is more efficient than saline in detecting biofilm contamination of endoscopes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment on Experimental Bacterial Biofilms and in Clinical Practice of the Efficacy of Sampling Solutions for Microbiological Testing of Endoscopes

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After placement of the disinfected connection hose into the elevator channel with a suitable adapter, the disinfection, rinsing, and drying should be performed. The diameter of the channel is too small, so maximum 5 cc syringe was used [4][5][6]11].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, a more rapid method is needed to inspect the reprocessing of endoscopes. The Gastroenterological Society of Australia and the European Society of Gastroenterology (ESGE)-European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) have published guidelines for the surveillance of endoscopes [6,7]. The FDA recommended supplemental measures to enhance the endoscope-reprocessing with the microbiological culture, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published an interim guidelines that recommended the microbiological culture of duodenoscopes in 2015 [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Assessment and Improvement of the Steps in the Endoscope-Reprocessing: A Hospital Report

Gedık¹

2017

JBMOA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the endoscope reprocessing procedure of our hospital that succeeded in an effective cleaning that was validated with the microbiological cultures and ATP-bioluminescence tool kit. Material and methods:The endoscope reprocessing procedure was inspected by the microbiological cultures and then ATP-bioluminescence tool kit in the endoscopy units of gastroenterology and general surgery wards of the Ministry of Health Bakırköy Sadi Konuk Research Hospital between April and December 2014. Results:Of the examined 42 flexible endoscopes, four of them (9%) were contaminated. In microbiological cultures, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (> 100,000 cfu/mL) was isolated from irrigation bottles. Extended-spectrum betalactamases and plasmid-mediated carbapenamase producing K. pneumonia and AmpC beta-lactamase producing P. aeruginosa (> 100,000 cfu/mL) were isolated from elevator behind. Each step of the reprocessing procedure was inspected and revised, if it was needed. There was not found contamination in the endoscopes after revising procedure. Conclusion:The ATP-bioluminescence method is a cost-effective method to monitor and to evaluate the endoscope reprocessing. Biofilm formation is very important to harbor resistant microorganisms in the endoscopes. The microbiological monitoring and cleaning procedures of endoscopes should be defined taking into the conditions of the setting in the settings. In case of any outbreak related to endoscopes, each step of the procedure should be checked and revised according to the guidelines, reported outbreaks, and instructions of endoscope manufacturers.

show abstract

“…The Gastroenterological Society of Australia guideline (2006) recommends the microbiologic monitoring of ERCP endoscopes and bronchoscopes every 4 weeks and all other gastrointestinal endoscopes every 4 months. According to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline, routine microbiological testing of endoscopes is advised to perform at intervals no longer than 3 months (Beilenhoff et al, 2007). Every microbiological surveillance system has one important limitation.…”

Section: Surveillance Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Every microbiological surveillance system has one important limitation. If there is a clinical demand for reuse of an endoscope in the mean time, surveillance culture results will likely not be obtained until after the endoscope is used on the next patient because cultures take a minimum of 24 to 48 hours to incubate (Beilenhoff et al, 2007).…”

Section: Surveillance Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usefulness of Bacteriological Monitoring of Endoscope Reprocessing

Kovaleva¹,

Buss²

2011

Therapeutic Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ESGE-ESGENA guideline for quality assurance in reprocessing: Microbiological surveillance testing in endoscopy

Abstract: and the ESGE Guidelines Committee 7 Institutions Institutions are listed at the end of the guideline.

Cited by 169 publications

References 10 publications

Assessment on Experimental Bacterial Biofilms and in Clinical Practice of the Efficacy of Sampling Solutions for Microbiological Testing of Endoscopes

Assessment on Experimental Bacterial Biofilms and in Clinical Practice of the Efficacy of Sampling Solutions for Microbiological Testing of Endoscopes

The Assessment and Improvement of the Steps in the Endoscope-Reprocessing: A Hospital Report

Usefulness of Bacteriological Monitoring of Endoscope Reprocessing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About