On-site comparison of an enzymatic detergent and a non-enzymatic detergent-disinfectant for routine manual cleaning of flexible endoscopes

Abstract

Background and study aims Flexible endoscopes are potential vectors of pathogen transmission to patients that are subjected to cleaning and high-level disinfection after each procedure. Efficient manual cleaning is a prerequisite for effective high-level disinfection. The goal of this study was to demonstrate the impact of the cleaning chemistry in the outcome of the manual cleaning of endoscopes.

Materials and methods Twelve endoscopes were included in this study: four colonoscopes, four gastroscopes, two duodenoscopes and two bronchoscopes. This study was designed with two phases; in each of them, the manual cleaning procedure remained identical, but a different detergent was used: a non-enzymatic detergent-disinfectant (NEDD) and an enzymatic detergent (ED). Biopsy and suction channels of endoscopes were sampled using 10 mL of physiological saline at two points: before and after manual cleaning, and adenosine triphosphate (ATP) was measured on each sample. In total, 208 procedures were analyzed for the NEDD phase and 253 for the ED phase.

Results For each endoscope type, cleaning endoscopes with ED resulted in larger median decrease in ATP than with NEDD: respectively 99.43 % and 95.95 % for bronchoscopes (P = 0.0007), 99.28 % and 96.93 % for colonoscopes (P < 0.0001) and 98.36 % and 95.36 % for gastroscopes (P < 0.0001). In addition, acceptability rates of endoscopes based on defined post-manual cleaning ATP thresholds (200, 150, 100 or 50 relative light units) for all endoscope types were significantly higher with ED compared to NEDD.

Conclusions With all other parameters of manual cleaning remaining unchanged, the enzymatic chemistry of ED provided more consistent and improved cleaning of endoscopes compared to NEDD. Therefore, choice of the detergent for endoscope cleaning has an impact on the outcome of this process.

^* These authors contributed equally.

• References

• 1 Rutala WA, Weber DJ. HICPAC. CDC Guidelines for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities. 2008; 1-27
• 2 Owings MF, Kozak LJ. Ambulatory and inpatient procedures in the United States, 1996. Vital Heal Stat 1998; 13: 1-119
• 3 Spaulding E. Chemical disinfection of medical and surgical materials. In: Lawrence C, Block S. (Hrsg.) Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. Philadelphia: Lea & Febriger; 1968: 517-531
• 4 Banerjee S, Shen B, Nelson DB. et al. Infection control during GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 781-790
• 5 Beilenhoff U, Neumann CS, Rey JF. et al. ESGE-ESGENA guideline: Cleaning and disinfection in gastrointestinal endoscopy: Update 2008. Endoscopy 2008; 40: 939-957
• 6 Joshi SG. Acinetobacter baumannii : An emerging pathogenic threat to public health. World J Clin Infect Dis 2013; 3: 25-36
• 7 Rutala WA, Weber DJ. New developments in reprocessing semicritical items. Am J Infect Control 2013; 41: 60-66
• 8 Bradford BD, Seiberling KA, Park FE. et al. Disinfection of rigid nasal endoscopes following in vitro contamination with Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2013; 139: 574-578
• 9 Kovaleva J, Peters FTM, van der Mei HC. et al. Transmission of infection by flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy. Clin Microbiol Rev 2013; 26: 231-254
• 10 Bajolet O, Ciocan D, Vallet C. et al. Gastroscopy-associated transmission of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Hosp Infect 2013; 83: 341-343
• 11 Kola A, Piening B, Pape U-F. et al. An outbreak of carbapenem-resistant OXA-48 - producing Klebsiella pneumonia associated to duodenoscopy. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2015; 4: 8-12
• 12 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: 1447-1455
• 13 Neves MS, da Silva MG, Ventura GM. et al. Effectiveness of current disinfection procedures against biofilm on contaminated GI endoscopes. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 944-953
• 14 Alfa MJ, Fatima I, Olson N. The adenosine triphosphate test is a rapid and reliable audit tool to assess manual cleaning adequacy of flexible endoscope channels. Am J Infect Control 2013; 41
• 15 Alfa MJ, Olson N. Simulated-use validation of a sponge ATP method for determining the adequacy of manual cleaning of endoscope channels. BMC Res Notes 2016; 9: 258-264
• 16 Fushimi R, Takashina M, Yoshikawa H. et al. Comparison of adenosine triphosphate, microbiological load, and residual protein as indicators for assessing the cleanliness of flexible gastrointestinal endoscopes. Am J Infect Control 2013; 41: 161-164
• 17 Qiu L, Zhou Z, Liu Q. et al. Investigating the failure of repeated standard cleaning and disinfection of a Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected pancreatic and biliary endoscope. Am J Infect Control 2015; 43: e43-e46
• 18 Ofstead CL, Westzler HP, Doyle EM. et al. Persistent contamination on colonoscopes and gastroscopes detected by biologic cultures and rapid indicators despite reprocessing performed in accordance with guidelines. Am J Infect Control 2015; 43: 794-801
• 19 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
• 20 Ofstead CL, Wetzler HP, Snyder AK. et al. Endoscope reprocessing methods. Gastroenterol Nurs 2010; 33: 304-311
• 21 Hervé R, Keevil CW. Current limitations about the cleaning of luminal endoscopes. J Hosp Infect 2013; 83: 22-29
• 22 Alfa MJ, Fatima I, Olson N. Validation of adenosine triphosphate to audit manual cleaning of flexible endoscope channels. Am J Infect Control 2013; 41: 245-248
• 23 Ofstead CL, Wetzler HP, Doyle EM. et al. Persistent contamination on colonoscopes and gastroscopes detected by biologic cultures and rapid indicators despite reprocessing performed in accordance with guidelines. Am J Infect Control 2015; 43: 794-801
• 24 Aumeran C, Thibert E, Chapelle F. 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: 938-942
• 25 da Costa LucianoC, Olson N, Tipple AFV. et al. Evaluation of the ability of different detergents and disinfectants to remove and kill organisms in traditional biofilm. Am J Infect Control 2016; 44: e243-e249
• 26 Martiny H, Floss H, Zühlsdorf B. The importance of cleaning for the overall results of processing endoscopes. J Hosp Infect 2004; 56: 16-22
• 27 Gillespie E, Sievert W, Swan M. et al. Adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence to validate decontamination of endoscopes. J Hosp Infect 2017; 97: 353-356
• 28 Zühlsdorf B, Floss H, Martiny H. Efficacy of 10 different cleaning processes in a washer-disinfector for flexible endoscopes. J Hosp Infect 2004; 56: 305-311
• 29 Hadi R, Vickery K, Deva A. et al. Biofilm removal by medical device cleaners: comparison of two bioreactor detection assays. J Hosp Infect 2010; 74: 160-167
• 30 Stiefel P, Mauerhofer S, Schneider J. et al. Enzymes enhance biofilm removal efficiency of cleaners. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2016; 60: 3647-3652
• 31 Ren W, Sheng X, Huang X. et al. Evaluation of detergents and contact time on biofilm removal from flexible endoscopes. Am J Infect Control 2013; 41: 1-4
• 32 Fang Y, Shen Z, Li L. et al. A study of the efficacy of bacterial biofilm cleanout for gastrointestinal endoscopes. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 1019-1024
• 33 Humphries RM, McDonnell G. Superbugs on duodenoscopes: The challenge of cleaning and disinfection of reusable devices. J Clin Microbiol 2015; 53: 3118-3125