Chantarojanasiri Tanyaporn, Rungrueangmaitree Rachanikorn, Thongsri Siriporn, Jampa-Ngern Urasa, Ratanachu-Ek Thawee
Department of Internal Medicine Rajavithi Hospital, College of Medicine, Rangsit University Bangkok Thailand.
Department of Internal Medicine Charoenkrung Pracharak Hospital Bangkok Thailand.
DEN Open. 2025 Mar 9;5(1):e70093. doi: 10.1002/deo2.70093. eCollection 2025 Apr.
This study aimed to evaluate the disparity in culture results between sterilization and high-level disinfection (HLD) for duodenoscopes and linear endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and to assess the effectiveness of different bacterial contamination detection methods.
This is a prospective randomized study, including duodenoscopes and linear EUS with adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay values below 200 relative light units after manual cleaning which were randomly assigned to undergo either sterilization or HLD in a 1:1 ratio. Following disinfection, all endoscopes were subjected to adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay testing and cultures using both swab and liquid samples from endoscope channels.
Totally 752 endoscopes (444 duodenoscopes and 308 linear EUS) were studied. After disinfection, the positive culture rates for the sterilization and HLD groups were 5.9% and 7.2%, respectively ( = 0.460). No significant difference in contamination rates was observed between duodenoscopes and linear EUS (5.9% and 7.5%, respectively; = 0.379), and no significant association between contamination rates and the presence of biliary stones was seen (7.3% vs. 6.9%; = 0.613). The detection rate of bacteria from liquid samples taken from endoscope channels was 0.5%, which was significantly lower than the swabbing method (6.0%, < 0.001).
This study found no statistically significant difference in contamination rates between sterilization and HLD methods for gastrointestinal endoscope reprocessing. The type of endoscope and the presence of biliary stones did not influence the positive culture rate. The swabbing method showed significantly higher bacterial detection when compared with liquid samples.
本研究旨在评估十二指肠镜和线性超声内镜(EUS)灭菌与高水平消毒(HLD)之间的培养结果差异,并评估不同细菌污染检测方法的有效性。
这是一项前瞻性随机研究,包括手动清洗后三磷酸腺苷生物发光测定值低于200相对光单位的十二指肠镜和线性EUS,它们以1:1的比例随机分配接受灭菌或HLD。消毒后,所有内镜均进行三磷酸腺苷生物发光测定测试,并使用内镜通道的拭子和液体样本进行培养。
共研究了752条内镜(444条十二指肠镜和308条线性EUS)。消毒后,灭菌组和HLD组的阳性培养率分别为5.9%和7.2%(P = 0.460)。十二指肠镜和线性EUS之间的污染率无显著差异(分别为5.9%和7.5%;P = 0.379),污染率与胆石的存在之间也无显著关联(7.3%对6.9%;P = 0.613)。从内镜通道采集的液体样本的细菌检出率为0.5%,显著低于拭子法(6.0%,P < 0.001)。
本研究发现,胃肠道内镜再处理的灭菌和HLD方法之间的污染率无统计学显著差异。内镜类型和胆石的存在不影响阳性培养率。与液体样本相比,拭子法显示出显著更高的细菌检出率。