Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-2bdfx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-30T03:41:58.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental Evaluation of an Automated Endoscope Reprocessor With In Situ Generation of Peracetic Acid for Disinfection of Semicritical Devices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Syed A. Sattar ,
Richard J. Kibbee ,
Jason A. Tetro  and
Tony A. Rook
Syed A. Sattar*
Affiliation:
Centre for Research on Environmental Microbiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario
Richard J. Kibbee
Affiliation:
Centre for Research on Environmental Microbiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario
Jason A. Tetro
Affiliation:
Centre for Research on Environmental Microbiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario
Tony A. Rook
Affiliation:
Steris Corporation, Mentor, Ohio
*
Centre for Research on Environmental Microbiology, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, CanadaK1H 8M5 (ssattar@uottawa.ca)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To evaluate the effectiveness of a high-level disinfection solution generated inside an endoscope processing system for decontaminating external and internal surfaces of experimentally contaminated heat-sensitive medical devices.

Methods.

The American Society for Testing and Materials Simulated-Use Test protocol (E1837-02), which incorporates a soil load in each inoculum, was used to evaluate the efficacy of the system when processing 4 common types of endoscopes contaminated separately with 5 types of nosocomial pathogens: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 15442), spores of Clostridium difficile (ATCC 9689), a glutaraldehyde-resistant strain of Mycobacterium chelonae, a vancomycin-resistant strain of Enterococcus faecalis, and a methicillin-resistant strain of Staphylococcus aureus. Rinse solution samples from channels and from surfaces of the processed endoscopes were tested for any microbicidal residues.

Results.

For all organisms tested, the baseline level of contamination of the endoscopes ranged from 5 log10 to greater than 7 log10 at each external surface site and internal channel. All tests showed reductions in viability of the test organisms to undetectable levels. All rinse solution samples from external and internal sites of the endoscopes proved to be free of any residual microbicidal activity.

Conclusions.

The endoscope reprocessor, with its processor-generated high-level disinfection solution, successfully reduced the numbers of selected, clinically relevant pathogens to undetectable levels both in the channels and on the outside surfaces of the 4 representative endoscopes tested in this study.

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 27 , Issue 11 , November 2006 , pp. 1193 - 1199
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Nelson, DB, Jarvis, WR, Rutala, WA, et al. Multi-society guideline for reprocessing flexible gastrointestinal endoscopes. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47:413–420.Google Scholar
2. Spach, DH, Silverstein, FE, Stamm, WE. Transmission of infection by gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118:117–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Fraser, VJ, Jones, M, Murray, PR, Medoff, G, Zhang, Y, Wallace, RJ Jr. Contamination of flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopes with Mycobacterium chelonae linked to an automated bronchoscope disinfection machine. Am Rev Respir Dis 1992; 145:853–855.Google Scholar
4. Sungkanuparph, S, Sathapatayavongs, B, Pracharktam, R. Infections with rapidly growing mycobacteria: report of 20 cases. Int J Infect Dis 2003; 7:198–205.Google Scholar
5. Sethi, NK, Aggarwal, PK, Duggal, L, Sachar, VP. Mycobacterium chelonae infection following laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy. J Assoc Physicians India 2003; 51:81–82.Google Scholar
6. Zhibang, Y, BiXia, Z, Qishan, L, Lihao, C, Xiangquan, L, Huaping, L. Large-scale outbreak of infection with Mycobacterium chelonae subsp. abscessus after penicillin injection. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40:2626–2628.Google Scholar
7. Lee, SC, Hua, CC, Yu, TJ, Shieh, WB, See, LC. Risk factors of mortality for nosocomial pneumonia: importance of initial anti-microbial therapy. Int J Clin Pract 2005; 59:39.Google Scholar
8. Foliente, RL, Kovacs, BJ, Aprecio, RM, Bains, HJ, Kettering, JD, Chen, YK. Efficacy of high-level disinfectants for reprocessing GI endoscopes in simulated-use testing. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53:456–462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Grenet, M, Tsouria, D, Desseaux, G, Blondeua, E, Verheyde, I. Haemorrhagic colitis after colonoscopy. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2004; 23:499–500.Google Scholar
10. Stein, BL, Lamoureux, E, Miller, M, Vasilevsky, CA, Julien, L, Gordon, PH. Glutaraldehyde induced colitis. Can J Surg 2001; 44:113–116.Google ScholarPubMed
11. Rideout, K, Teschke, K, Dimich-Ward, H, Kennedy, SM. Considering risks to healthcare workers from glutaraldehyde alternatives in high-level disinfection. J Hosp Infect 2005; 59:4–11.Google Scholar
12. Rutala, WA, Weber, DJ. Disinfection of endoscopes: review of new chemical sterilants used for high-level disinfection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999; 20:69–76.Google Scholar
13. Luu Duc, D, Ribiollete, A, Dode, X, Ducel, G, Marchetti, B, Calop, J. Evaluation of the microbial efficacy of the Steris System 1 for digestive endoscopes using GEMANDE and ASTM validation protocols. J Hosp Infect 2001; 48:135–141.Google Scholar
14. Griffiths, PA, Babb, JR, Bradley, CR, Fraise, AP. Glutaraldehyde-resistantMycobacterium chelonae from endoscope washer disinfectors. J Appl Microbiol 1997; 82:519–528.Google Scholar
15. ASTM International. Standard Test Method to Determine Efficacy of Disinfection Processes for Reusable Medical Devices (Simulated Use Test). West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2002. Document E-1837-02.Google Scholar
16. AOAC International. Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants: AOAC Official Method 966.04; Section E: Synthetic Hard Water. Gaithersburg, MD; AAOC International; 1998.Google Scholar
17. Rutala, WA, Weber, DJ. Disinfection and sterilization in health care facilities: what clinicians need to know. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39:702–709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Nelson, DB. Recent advances in epidemiology and prevention of gastrointestinal endoscopy related infections. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2005; 18:326–330.Google Scholar
19. Rutala, WA, Weber, DJ. Reprocessing endoscopes: United States perspective. J Hosp Infect 2004;56(Suppl 2):S27–S39.Google Scholar