Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of two endoscope channel cleaning approaches to remove cyclic build-up biofilm.
Moshkanbaryans, L; Shah, V; Tan, L Y; Jones, M P; Vickery, K; Alfa, M; Burdach, J.
Afiliación
  • Moshkanbaryans L; Medical Affairs, Nanosonics Ltd, Sydney, Australia.
  • Shah V; Bioscience, Nanosonics Ltd, Sydney, Australia.
  • Tan LY; Clinical Affairs, Nanosonics Ltd, Sydney, Australia.
  • Jones MP; School of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Health & Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
  • Vickery K; Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
  • Alfa M; AlfaMed Consulting, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
  • Burdach J; Medical Affairs, Nanosonics Ltd, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: j.burdach@nanosonics.com.
J Hosp Infect ; 150: 91-95, 2024 Jun 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38830542
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Biofilm contributes significantly to bacterial persistence in endoscope channels. Enhanced cleaning methods capable of removing biofilm from all endoscope channels are required to decrease infection risk to patients. This head-to-head study compared cyclic build-up biofilm removal of an automated endoscope channel cleaner (AECC) with standard manual cleaning according to instructions for use (IFU) in polytetrafluorethylene channels.

METHODS:

Cyclic build-up biofilm was grown in 1.4-mm (representing air/water and auxiliary channels) and 3.7-mm (representing suction/ biopsy channels) inner diameter polytetrafluorethylene channels. All channels were tested for residual total organic carbon, protein, and viable bacteria. Internationally recognized ISO 15883-52021 alert levels were used as cleaning benchmarks for protein (3 µg/cm2) and total organic carbon (6 µg/cm2).

RESULTS:

The automated cleaner significantly outperformed manual cleaning for all markers assessed (protein, total organic carbon, viable bacteria) in 1.4-mm and 3.7-mm channels representing air/water/auxiliary and suction/biopsy channels, respectively. Manual cleaning failed to remove biofilm from the air/water and auxiliary channels. According to the IFU, these channels are not brushed, suggesting a potential root cause for a portion of the numerous endoscopy-associated infections reported in the literature.

CONCLUSION:

AECC shows potential to deliver enhanced cleaning over current practice to all endoscope channels and may thereby address infection risk.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Hosp Infect Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Hosp Infect Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article