2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.mycmed.2017.01.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Retrospective study of Candida sp. contaminations of endoscopes at the University Hospital of Tlemcen (Algeria)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Algerian study has also shown the importance of compressed air drying in the reduction of nosocomial infections linked to endoscopes by yeasts specially Candida sp. [12].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Algerian study has also shown the importance of compressed air drying in the reduction of nosocomial infections linked to endoscopes by yeasts specially Candida sp. [12].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Four articles mainly explored microbial contamination after gastrointestinal endoscope drying [24][25][26][27]. Grandval et al [24] compared the drying effects of storage cabinets for heat-sensitive endoscopes (SCHE) (all endoscope channels were sequentially rinsed with medical-grade air or highly efficient filtered particulate air (HEPA) to achieve air circulation for 10 min per endoscope and achieve a drying effect) and the drying effects of a conventional storage cabinet, showing that 56.1% (n = 23) of endoscopes in the intervention group were not contaminated.…”
Section: Microbial Contaminationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results of endoscope sterilization without drying were compared with that of first sterilizing and then drying endoscope channels with compressed air. Evidence demonstrated that 25 Candida strains were isolated at the first evaluation and 9 Candida strains were isolated in the final two evaluations [27]. Chan et al [26] used 30 ml of 75% ethanol to rinse each channel of the endoscope, let the channels sit for 3 min, and then flushed each channel with compressed air for 30 s; the qualified rate of microbial detection from this method was compared with the qualified rate of microbial detection without drying and compressed air flushing for 30 s. There was a 5 Gastroenterology Research and Practice significant difference (A group, 73.73%; B group, 77.08%; C group, 89.52%).…”
Section: Microbial Contaminationmentioning
confidence: 99%