Costs of purchase, maintenance, microbiological control, and reprocessing of a reusable duodenoscope.

Background and study aims The costs of reusable endoscope reprocessing have been evaluated, yet external validity of the findings remains challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the costs of purchase, maintenance, microbiological control, and reprocessing of a reusable duodenoscope per endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in France. Study findings exclude the costs of infection, downtime due to breakdown, reprocessing single-use material disposal, and device disposal, all of which should also be considered. Materials and methods The study encompassed both observational and theoretical approaches. Observational data were collected in four hospitals, from December 2019 to December 2020, with an ad hoc survey, based on 2016 and 2018 national guidelines for duodenoscope reprocessing. Costs were modeled, using the same guidelines, assuming a mean workload of 223 ERCP/duodenoscope/year. Results The mean observed cost of purchase, maintenance, microbiological control, reprocessing (human resources and consumables), and overhead (additional 35%) with a reusable duodenoscope was €80.23 (standard deviation €3.77) per ERCP. The corresponding mean theoretical cost was €182.71 for manual reprocessing without endoscope drying cabinet (EDC), €191.36 for manual reprocessing with EDC, €235.25 for automated endoscope reprocessing (AER) without EDC, and €253.62 for AER with EDC. Conclusions Because procedures, equipment, volume activity, number of duodenoscopes, human resources, and internal work organizations are hospital-dependent, observed costs varied between hospitals. Theoretical costs were higher than observed costs, showing that the theoretical approach is not sufficient. Hypotheses to explain the difference between the two approaches include failing to measure some costs in the survey and challenges in guideline implementation.

Laparoscopic intraoperative pancreatoscopy for main duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms assessment.

Video 1Intraoperative pancreatoscopy during laparoscopic pancreatic resection for main pancreatic duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms.

Esophageal circumferential en bloc endoscopic submucosal dissection: assessment of a new technique.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic esophageal piecemeal mucosectomy for high-grade dysplasia on Barrett's esophagus leads to suboptimal histologic evaluation, as well as recurrence on remaining mucosa. Circumferential en bloc mucosal resection would significantly improve the management of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Our aim was to describe a new method of esophageal circumferential endoscopic en bloc submucosal dissection (CESD) in a swine model. METHODS: After submucosal injection, circumferential incision was performed at each end of the esophageal segment to be removed. Mechanical submucosal dissection was performed from the proximal to the distal incision, using a mucosectomy cap over the endoscope. The removed mucosal ring was retrieved. Clinical, endoscopic, and histologic data were prospectively collected. RESULTS: Esophageal CESD was conducted on 5 pigs. A median mucosal length of 6.5 cm (range, 4 to 8 cm) was removed in the lower third of the esophagus. The mean duration of the procedure was 36 minutes (range, 17 to 80 min). No procedure-related complication, including perforation, was observed. All animals exhibited a mild esophageal stricture at day 7, and a severe symptomatic stricture at day 14. Necropsy confirmed endoscopic findings with cicatricial fibrotic strictures. On histologic examination, an inflammatory cell infiltrate, diffuse fibrosis reaching the muscular layer, and incomplete reepithelialization were observed. CONCLUSIONS: CESD enables expeditious resection and thorough examination of large segments of esophageal mucosa in safe procedural conditions, but esophageal strictures occur in the majority of the cases. Efficient methods for stricture prevention are needed for this technique to be developed in humans.

Prediction of drainage effectiveness during endoscopic stenting of malignant hilar strictures: the role of liver volume assessment.

BACKGROUND: The optimal endoscopic approach to the drainage of malignant hilar strictures remains controversial, especially with regard to the extent of desirable drainage and unilateral or bilateral stenting. OBJECTIVE: To identify useful criteria for predicting successful endoscopic drainage. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective 2-center study in the greater Paris area in France. PATIENTS: A total of 107 patients who had undergone endoscopic stenting for hilar tumors Bismuth type II, III, or IV and a set of contemporaneous cross-sectional imaging data available. INTERVENTIONS: The relative volumetry of the 3 main hepatic sectors (left, right anterior, and right posterior) was assessed on CT scans. The liver volume drained was estimated and classified into 1 of 3 classes: less than 30%, 30% to 50%, and more than 50% of the total liver volume. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was effective drainage, defined as a decrease in the bilirubin level of more than 50% at 30 days after drainage. Secondary outcomes were early cholangitis rate and survival. RESULTS: The main factor associated with drainage effectiveness was a liver volume drained of more than 50% (odds ratio 4.5, P = .001), especially in Bismuth III strictures. Intubating an atrophic sector (<30%) was useless and increased the risk of cholangitis (odds ratio 3.04, P = .01). A drainage > 50% was associated with a longer median survival (119 vs 59 days, P = .005). LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneous population and volume assessment methodology to improve in further prospective studies. CONCLUSION: Draining more than 50% of the liver volume, which frequently requires bilateral stent placement, seems to be an important predictor of drainage effectiveness in malignant, especially Bismuth III, hilar strictures. A pre-ERCP assessment of hepatic volume distribution on cross-sectional imaging may optimize endoscopic procedures.

Reliability, cost-effectiveness, and safety of reuse of ancillary devices for ERCP.

BACKGROUND: The choice between reusable and single-use devices for ERCP depends on various medical and economic criteria. This study evaluated the reliability and the safety (risk of cross-contamination) of reusable devices. A cost analysis of the use of reusable devices also was conducted. METHODS: All patients referred for ERCP that required use of a sphincterotome or a retrieval basket were eligible for inclusion in a clinical study of 4 different devices (3 types of sphincterotome, 1 type of retrieval basket). All devices were steam sterilized. Before each use, each device was subjected to bacteriologic and virologic tests (hepatitis C virus, hepatitis B virus markers). Devices were examined before and after each procedure. The numbers of safe and efficient procedures that could be performed with each device were assessed. Three strategies were compared in a cost analysis: internal reprocessing (strategy 1), external reprocessing (strategy 2), and single-use (strategy 3). Inputs used were the results of the clinical study, hospital data for 1 year of endoscopic activity, and market prices. RESULTS: A total of 342 patients underwent the following procedures: sphincterotomy (248 patients), stent insertion (59 patients), use of basket without sphincterotomy (14 patients), and diagnostic ERCP/unsuccessful cannulation (21 patients). At the time of ERCP, 36 patients had viral or bacterial infection. Fifty instruments were used (20 single-lumen sphincterotomes, 10 double lumen sphincterotomes, 20 retrieval baskets). Overall, the median number of efficient uses per device was 10. The median number of efficient uses by each type of device was the following: single-lumen sphincterotome, 12; double-lumen sphincterotome, 8; and, retrieval baskets, 10. All virologic and bacteriologic tests for all instruments were negative. The cost-optimization analysis found that strategy 1 is cost effective (euro37,283/y) compared with strategy 2 (euro40,101/y) and especially with Strategy 3 (euro115,210/y). CONCLUSIONS: Reuse of the sphincterotomes and baskets evaluated in this study during ERCP is safe in terms of infectious hazards. Because they endure numerous uses, reusable instruments are cost effective, especially when compared with single-use accessories.