High prevalence rate of digestive tract bacteria in duodenoscopes: a nationwide study

Arjan W Rauwers, Anne F Voor In 't Holt, Jolanda G Buijs, Woutrinus de Groot, Bettina E Hansen, Marco J Bruno, Margreet C Vos, Arjan W Rauwers, Anne F Voor In 't Holt, Jolanda G Buijs, Woutrinus de Groot, Bettina E Hansen, Marco J Bruno, Margreet C Vos

Abstract

Objective: Increasing numbers of outbreaks caused by contaminated duodenoscopes used for Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures have been reported, some with fatal outcomes. We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional study to determine the prevalence of bacterial contamination of reprocessed duodenoscopes in The Netherlands.

Design: All 73 Dutch ERCP centres were invited to sample ≥2 duodenoscopes using centrally distributed kits according to uniform sampling methods, explained by video instructions. Depending on duodenoscope type, four to six sites were sampled and centrally cultured. Contamination was defined as (1) any microorganism with ≥20 colony forming units (CFU)/20 mL (AM20) and (2) presence of microorganisms with gastrointestinal or oral origin, independent of CFU count (MGO).

Results: Sixty-seven out of 73 centres (92%) sampled 745 sites of 155 duodenoscopes. Ten different duodenoscope types from three distinct manufacturers were sampled including 69 (46%) Olympus TJF-Q180V, 43 (29%) Olympus TJF-160VR, 11 (7%) Pentax ED34-i10T, 8 (5%) Pentax ED-3490TK and 5 (3%) Fujifilm ED-530XT8. Thirty-three (22%) duodenoscopes from 26 (39%) centres were contaminated (AM20). On 23 (15%) duodenoscopes MGO were detected, including Enterobacter cloacae, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumonia and yeasts. For both definitions, contamination was not duodenoscope type dependent (p values: 0.20 and higher).

Conclusion: In 39% of all Dutch ERCP centres, at least one AM20-contaminated patient-ready duodenoscope was identified. Fifteen per cent of the duodenoscopes harboured MGO, indicating residual organic material of previous patients, that is, failing of disinfection. These results suggest that the present reprocessing and process control procedures are not adequate and safe.

Keywords: endoscopic retrograde pancreatography; endoscopy.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: AWR, AFV in ‘t holt, JGB and RDG reported no relevant financial activities. BEH has had the following relevant financial activities outside the submitted work: Consultant for Intercept Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Consultant for Novartis; Consultant for Albiero; Received grants from Intercept Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Received grants from Roche International. MJB has had the following relevant financial activities outside the submitted work: Consultant for 3M; Grant from 3M for an investigator initiated study for the benefit of the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Consultant and lecturer for Boston Scientific; Grants from Boston Scientific for investigator initiated studies and industry initiated studies for the benefit of the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Consultant and lecturer for Cook Medical; Grants from Cook Medical for investigator initiated studies and industry initiated studies for the benefit of the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Grant of Pentax Medical for the benefit of the Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. MCV has had the following relevant financial activities outside the submitted work: Grant from 3M for an investigator initiated study.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram. ERCP, Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.
Figure 2
Figure 2
OR for each duodenoscope type on contamination. AM20, microbial growth with ≥20 CFU/20 mL of any type of microorganism; CFU, colony forming units; MGO, presence of any microbial growth of gastrointestinal or oral microorganisms.
Figure 3
Figure 3
OR for each sample site on contamination. AM20, microbial growth with ≥20 CFU/20 mL of any type of microorganism; CFU, colony forming units; MGO, presence of any microbial growth of gastrointestinal or oral microorganisms.

References

    1. Kola A, Piening B, Pape UF, et al. . An outbreak of carbapenem-resistant OXA-48 - producing Klebsiella pneumonia associated to duodenoscopy. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2015;4:8 10.1186/s13756-015-0049-4
    1. Verfaillie CJ, Bruno MJ, Voor in ’t Holt AF, et al. . Withdrawal of a novel-design duodenoscope ends outbreak of a VIM-2-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Endoscopy 2015;47:493–502. 10.1055/s-0034-1391886
    1. Epstein L, Hunter JC, Arwady MA, et al. . New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-producing carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli associated with exposure to duodenoscopes. JAMA 2014;312:1447–55. 10.1001/jama.2014.12720
    1. Alrabaa SF, Nguyen P, Sanderson R, et al. . Early identification and control of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, originating from contaminated endoscopic equipment. Am J Infect Control 2013;41:562–4. 10.1016/j.ajic.2012.07.008
    1. Kovaleva J. Infectious complications in gastrointestinal endoscopy and their prevention. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2016;30:689–704. 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.09.008
    1. United States Senate. Preventable Tragedies: superbugs and how ineffective monitoring of medical device safety fails patients. Washington, United States: United States Senate, 2016. (accessed 13 Jan 2016).
    1. Kovaleva J, Peters FT, van der Mei HC, et al. . Transmission of infection by flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy. Clin Microbiol Rev 2013;26:231–54. 10.1128/CMR.00085-12
    1. Kim S, Russell D, Mohamadnejad M, et al. . Risk factors associated with the transmission of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae via contaminated duodenoscopes. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;83:1121–9. 10.1016/j.gie.2016.03.790
    1. Wendorf KA, Kay M, Baliga C, et al. . Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-associated AmpC Escherichia coli outbreak. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:634–42. 10.1017/ice.2015.66
    1. Rutala WA, Weber DJ. Outbreaks of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections associated with duodenoscopes: What can we do to prevent infections? Am J Infect Control 2016;44:e47–e51. 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.10.037
    1. Petersen BT, Koch J, Ginsberg GG. Infection Using ERCP Endoscopes. Gastroenterology 2016;151:46–50. 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.05.040
    1. Advisory Board Cleaning and Disinfection Flexible Endoscopes (SFERD). Professional standard handbook. Flexible endoscopes - Cleaning and disinfection, 2016. (accessed 1 Sep 2016).
    1. Beilenhoff U, Neumann CS, Rey JF, et al. . ESGE-ESGENA guideline for quality assurance in reprocessing: microbiological surveillance testing in endoscopy. Endoscopy 2007;39:175–81. 10.1055/s-2006-945181
    1. Kovaleva J, Meessen NE, Peters FT, et al. . Is bacteriologic surveillance in endoscope reprocessing stringent enough? Endoscopy 2009;41:913–6. 10.1055/s-0029-1215086
    1. Loeve AJ. Investigational report on a TJF-Q180V duodenoscope following contamination after cleaning and disinfection. Available on request from the Dutch Healthcare Inspectorate/National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. Bilthoven, The Netherlands, 2012.
    1. Ross AS, Baliga C, Verma P, et al. . A quarantine process for the resolution of duodenoscope-associated transmission of multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli. Gastrointest Endosc 2015;82:477–83. 10.1016/j.gie.2015.04.036
    1. Brandabur JJ, Leggett JE, Wang L, et al. . Surveillance of guideline practices for duodenoscope and linear echoendoscope reprocessing in a large healthcare system. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;84:392–9. 10.1016/j.gie.2016.03.1480
    1. Saliou P, Le Bars H, Payan C, et al. . Measures to improve microbial quality surveillance of gastrointestinal endoscopes. Endoscopy 2016;48:704–10. 10.1055/s-0042-107591
    1. van Turenhout ST, Terhaar sive Droste JS, Meijer GA, et al. . Anticipating implementation of colorectal cancer screening in The Netherlands: a nation wide survey on endoscopic supply and demand. BMC Cancer 2012;12:46 10.1186/1471-2407-12-46
    1. Tennenbaum R, Colardelle P, Chochon M, et al. . [Hepatitis C after retrograde cholangiography]. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 1993;17:763–4.
    1. Saliou P, Cholet F, Jézéquel J, et al. . The use of channel-purge storage for gastrointestinal endoscopes reduces microbial contamination. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:1100–2. 10.1017/ice.2015.139
    1. Saviuc P, Picot-Guéraud R, Shum Cheong Sing J, et al. . Evaluation of the quality of reprocessing of gastrointestinal endoscopes. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:1017–23. 10.1017/ice.2015.123
    1. Working party on infection prevention (WIP). Heat-sensitive flexible endoscopes. Leiden, the Netherlands, 2015. (accessed 1 Jan 2016).
    1. Alfa MJ, Olson N, DeGagne P, et al. . A survey of reprocessing methods, residual viable bioburden, and soil levels in patient-ready endoscopic retrograde choliangiopancreatography duodenoscopes used in Canadian centers. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002;23:198–206. 10.1086/502035
    1. Gastroenterological Society of Australia / Gastroenterological Nurses College of Australia. Infection control in endoscopy. Mulgrave, Australia: Gastroenterological Society of Australia, 2010. (accessed 13 Jan 2016).
    1. Heroux R, Sheppard M, Wright SB, et al. . Duodenoscope hang time does not correlate with risk of bacterial contamination. Am J Infect Control 2017;45 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.11.021
    1. Snyder GM, Wright SB, Smithey A, et al. . Randomized comparison of 3 high-level disinfection and sterilization procedures for duodenoscopes. Gastroenterology 2017;153:1018–25. 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.06.052
    1. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Design of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) Duodenoscopes May Impede Effective Cleaning: FDA Safety Communication. USA, 2015. (Updated 4 Mar 2015).
    1. Ofstead CL, Wetzler HP, Heymann OL, et al. . Longitudinal assessment of reprocessing effectiveness for colonoscopes and gastroscopes: Results of visual inspections, biochemical markers, and microbial cultures. Am J Infect Control 2017;45:e26–e33. 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.10.017
    1. Lee DH, Kim DB, Kim HY, et al. . Increasing potential risks of contamination from repetitive use of endoscope. Am J Infect Control 2015;43:e13–e17. 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.01.017
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interim protocol for healthcare facilities regarding surveillance for bacterial contamination of duodenoscopes after reprocessing. Atlanta, United States, 2015. (accessed 19 Aug 2015).
    1. Buss AJ, Been MH, Borgers RP, et al. . Endoscope disinfection and its pitfalls--requirement for retrograde surveillance cultures. Endoscopy 2008;40:327–32. 10.1055/s-2007-995477
    1. Aumeran C, Thibert E, Chapelle FA, et al. . Assessment on experimental bacterial biofilms and in clinical practice of the efficacy of sampling solutions for microbiological testing of endoscopes. J Clin Microbiol 2012;50:938–42. 10.1128/JCM.06221-11
    1. Espigares E, Bueno A, Fernández-Crehuet M, et al. . Efficacy of some neutralizers in suspension tests determining the activity of disinfectants. J Hosp Infect 2003;55:137–40. 10.1016/S0195-6701(03)00238-X
    1. Ministere des Affaires sociales et de la sante. Guide Technique: traitement des endoscopes souples thermosensibles a canaux. France, 2016.
    1. Sutton SV, Proud DW, Rachui S, et al. . Validation of microbial recovery from disinfectants. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol 2002;56:255–66.
    1. van der Linde K, Lim BT, Rondeel JM, et al. . Improved bacteriological surveillance of haemodialysis fluids: a comparison between Tryptic soy agar and Reasoner’s 2A media. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1999;14:2433–7. 10.1093/ndt/14.10.2433
    1. Massa S, Caruso M, Trovatelli F, et al. . Comparison of plate count agar and R2A medium for enumeration of heterotrophic bacteria in natural mineral water. World J Microbiology and Biotechnology 1998;14:727–30. 10.1023/A:1008893627877
    1. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Executive summary: effective reprocessing of endoscopes used in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) Procedures. USA, 2015. (accessed 14 May 2015).
    1. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Updated information for healthcare providers regarding duodenoscopes. USA, 2015. (accessed 4 Mar 2015).

Source: PubMed

3
订阅