1St Boniface Research Center,Winnipeg,Manitoba,Canada.
3Department of Internal Medicine,University of Manitoba,Winnipeg,Manitoba,Canada.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017 Nov;38(11):1284-1290. doi: 10.1017/ice.2017.215. Epub 2017 Oct 17.
OBJECTIVE Biofilm has been implicated in bacterial persistence and survival after endoscope reprocessing. In this study, we assessed the impact of different methods of reprocessing on organic residues and viable bacteria after repeated rounds of biofilm formation when each was followed by full reprocessing. METHODS ATS-2015, an artificial test soil containing 5-8 Log10 colony-forming units (CFU) of Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, was used to form biofilm in polytetrafluroethylene channels overnight on 5 successive days. Each successive day, full pump-assisted cleaning using bristle brushes or pull-through devices in combination with enzymatic or nonenzymatic detergents followed by fully automated endoscope reprocessor disinfection using peracetic acid was performed. Residuals were visualized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Destructive testing was used to assess expected cutoffs for adenosine triphosphate (ATP; <200 relative light units), protein (<2 µg/cm2), and viable bacteria count (0 CFU). RESULTS Protein residuals were above 2 µg/cm2, but ATP residuals were <200 relative light units for all methods tested. Only when enzymatic cleaner was used for cleaning were there no viable bacteria detected after disinfection irrespective of whether bristle brushes or pull-through devices were used. SEM revealed that some residual debris remained after all reprocessing methods, but more residuals were detected when a nonenzymatic detergent was used. CONCLUSIONS Surviving E. faecalis and P. aeruginosa were only detected when the non-enzymatic detergent was used, emphasizing the importance of the detergent used for endoscope channel reprocessing. Preventing biofilm formation is critical because not all current reprocessing methods can reliably eliminate viable bacteria within the biofilm matrix. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1284-1290.
生物膜被认为与内镜再处理后细菌的持续存在和存活有关。本研究评估了不同的再处理方法对人工测试土壤(含有 5-8 对数菌落形成单位的粪肠球菌和铜绿假单胞菌)中生物膜形成后反复循环时有机物残留和活菌的影响,每次循环后都进行了彻底的再处理。
在连续 5 天的时间里,将 ATS-2015(一种含有 5-8 对数菌落形成单位的粪肠球菌和铜绿假单胞菌的人工测试土壤)放在聚四氟乙烯通道中过夜形成生物膜。在接下来的每一天,都采用刷丝刷或拉拔器联合酶或非酶清洁剂的泵辅助清洗,随后使用过氧乙酸进行全自动内镜处理器消毒。用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察残留物。破坏性试验用于评估腺苷三磷酸(ATP;<200 相对光单位)、蛋白质(<2 µg/cm2)和活菌计数(0 CFU)的预期截止值。
所有方法的蛋白质残留均>2 µg/cm2,但 ATP 残留均<200 相对光单位。只有在使用酶清洁剂进行清洗时,无论使用刷丝刷还是拉拔器,消毒后都没有检测到活菌。SEM 显示,所有再处理方法后都有一些残留的碎片,但使用非酶清洁剂时残留更多。
仅在使用非酶清洁剂时才检测到存活的粪肠球菌和铜绿假单胞菌,这强调了内镜通道再处理中使用的清洁剂的重要性。预防生物膜形成至关重要,因为并非所有当前的再处理方法都能可靠地消除生物膜基质内的活菌。
感染控制与医院流行病学 2017;38:1284-1290.