Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Infect Control ; 45(8): 888-895, 2017 Aug 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28625700

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There are no guidelines or quality benchmarks specific to ureteroscope reprocessing, and patient injuries and infections have been linked to ureteroscopes. This prospective study evaluated ureteroscope reprocessing effectiveness. METHODS: Reprocessing practices at 2 institutions were assessed. Microbial cultures, biochemical tests, and visual inspections were conducted on sterilized ureteroscopes. RESULTS: Researchers examined 16 ureteroscopes after manual cleaning and sterilization using hydrogen peroxide gas. Every ureteroscope had visible irregularities, such as discoloration, residual fluid, foamy white residue, scratches, or debris in channels. Tests detected contamination on 100% of ureteroscopes (microbial growth 13%, adenosine triphosphate 44%, hemoglobin 63%, and protein 100%). Contamination levels exceeded benchmarks for clean gastrointestinal endoscopes for hemoglobin (6%), adenosine triphosphate (6%), and protein (100%). A new, unused ureteroscope had hemoglobin and high protein levels after initial reprocessing, although no contamination was found before reprocessing. CONCLUSIONS: Flexible ureteroscope reprocessing methods were insufficient and may have introduced contamination. The clinical implications of residual contamination and viable microbes found on sterilized ureteroscopes are unknown. Additional research is needed to evaluate the prevalence of suboptimal ureteroscope reprocessing, identify sources of contamination, and determine clinical implications of urinary tract exposure to reprocessing chemicals, organic residue, and bioburden. These findings reinforce the need for frequent audits of reprocessing practices and the routine use of cleaning verification tests and visual inspection as recommended in reprocessing guidelines.


Asunto(s)
Desinfección/métodos , Contaminación de Equipos/prevención & control , Ureteroscopios/microbiología , Equipo Reutilizado , Adhesión a Directriz , Humanos , Control de Infecciones/métodos
2.
Am J Infect Control ; 45(2): e26-e33, 2017 Feb 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28159069

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Flexible endoscopes are currently reused following cleaning and high-level disinfection. Contamination has been found on endoscopes, and infections have been linked to gastrointestinal, respiratory, and urologic endoscopes. METHODS: This longitudinal study involved visual inspections with a borescope, microbial cultures, and biochemical tests for protein and adenosine triphosphate to identify endoscopes in need of further cleaning or maintenance. Three assessments were conducted over a 7-month period. Control group endoscopes reprocessed using customary practices were compared with intervention group endoscopes subjected to more rigorous reprocessing. RESULTS: At final assessment, all endoscopes (N = 20) had visible irregularities. Researchers observed fluid (95%), discoloration, and debris in channels. Of 12 (60%) endoscopes with microbial growth, 4 had no growth until after 48 hours. There were no significant differences in culture results by study group, assessment period, or endoscope type. Similar proportions of control and intervention endoscopes (~20%) exceeded postcleaning biochemical test benchmarks. Adenosine triphosphate levels were higher for gastroscopes than colonoscopes (P = .014). Eighty-five percent of endoscopes required repair due to findings. CONCLUSIONS: More rigorous reprocessing was not consistently effective. Seven-day incubation allowed identification of slow-growing microbes. These findings bolster the need for routine visual inspection and cleaning verification tests recommended in new reprocessing guidelines.


Asunto(s)
Colonoscopios , Descontaminación/métodos , Desinfección/métodos , Contaminación de Equipos , Equipo Reutilizado , Gastroscopios , Adenosina Trifosfato/análisis , Biomarcadores , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Estudios Prospectivos , Proteínas/análisis
3.
Am J Infect Control ; 44(11): 1237-1240, 2016 11 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27497824

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During a study designed to assess endoscope reprocessing effectiveness, a borescope was used to examine lumens and ports. Cloudy, white, viscous fluid was observed inside fully reprocessed gastroscopes and colonoscopes. This fluid resembled simethicone, which is commonly administered to reduce foam and bubbles that impede visualization during gastrointestinal endoscopy. This article describes methods used to determine whether the observed fluid contained simethicone. METHODS: Photographs of residual fluid were taken using a borescope. Sterile cotton-tipped swabs were used to collect samples of fluid observed in 3 endoscope ports. Samples were evaluated using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR)-attenuated total reflection analysis. RESULTS: Residual fluid was observed inside 19 of 20 endoscopes. Fluid photographed in 8 endoscopes resembled simethicone solutions. FTIR analysis confirmed the presence of simethicone in 2 endoscopes. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid containing simethicone remained inside endoscopes despite reprocessing. Simethicone is an inert, hydrophobic substance that may reduce reprocessing effectiveness. Simethicone solutions commonly contain sugars and thickeners, which may contribute to microbial growth and biofilm development. Studies are needed to assess the prevalence of residual moisture and simethicone in endoscopes and determine the impact on reprocessing effectiveness. We recommend minimizing the use of simethicone pending further research into its safety.


Asunto(s)
Antiespumantes/análisis , Descontaminación/métodos , Endoscopios Gastrointestinales , Simeticona/análisis , Humanos , Espectroscopía Infrarroja por Transformada de Fourier
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...