Safety and efficacy of a novel disposable sheathed gastroscopic system in clinical practice

Evaluation of a novel disposable endoscope for retroflexed endoscopic rubber band ligation of internal hemorrhoids: a randomized pilot study

PURPOSE

Retroflexed endoscopic rubber band ligation (ERBL) for treating Grade II and III internal hemorrhoids using disposable endoscopes has not been previously assessed. We therefore compared the safety and effectiveness of ERBL for internal hemorrhoids using novel disposable endoscopes versus traditional reusable endoscopes.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial involved 42 patients who underwent ERBL for Grade II and III internal hemorrhoids using either a disposable endoscope (n = 21) or a reusable endoscope (n = 21). Safety was assessed by the incidence of equipment failure, device-related adverse events, and in-procedure stability of vital signs. Effectiveness was assessed by the postoperative therapeutic effect, feasibility of retroflexed ERBL, and incidence of complications.

RESULTS

In terms of safety, no life-threatening events, equipment failure, or device-related adverse effects occurred during the procedures in either group. The rate of diastolic blood pressure stability was significantly different between the two groups (P = .049), but the rates of systolic blood pressure and heart rate stability were similar. In terms of effectiveness, the therapeutic effects on postoperative Day 30 were similar in both groups. Image clarity and endoscopic flexibility in the disposable endoscope group were mildly inferior to those in the reusable endoscope group, but without statistical significance. Matching between the endoscope and ligating device was 100% in both groups. The incidence of complications on postoperative Days 1 and 10 was not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared with reusable endoscopes, disposable endoscopes are equally safe, feasible, and reliable in ERBL for internal hemorrhoids.

Single-use accessories and endoscopes in the era of sustainability and climate change-A balancing act

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is among the highest waste generator in healthcare facilities. The major reasons include production of large-volume non-renewable waste, use of single-use devices, and reprocessing or decontamination processes. Single-use endoscopic accessories have gradually replaced reusable devices over last two decades contributing to the rising impact of GI endoscopy on ecosystem. Several reports of infection outbreaks with reusable duodenoscopes raised concerns regarding the efficacy and adherence to standard disinfection protocols. Even the enhanced reprocessing techniques like double high-level disinfection have not been found to be the perfect ways for decontamination of duodenoscopes and therefore, paved the way for the development of single-use duodenoscopes. However, the use of single-use endoscopes is likely to amplify the net waste generated and carbon footprint of any endoscopy unit. Moreover, single-use devices challenge one of the major pillars of sustainability, that is, "reuse." In the era of climate change, a balanced approach is required taking into consideration patient safety as well as financial and environmental implications. The possible solutions to provide optimum care while addressing the impact on climate include selective use of disposable duodenoscopes and careful selection of accessories during a case. Other options include use of disposable endcaps and development of effective high-level disinfection techniques. The collaboration between the healthcare professionals and the manufacturers is paramount for the development of environmental friendly devices with low carbon footprint.

A Systematic Review of Disposable Sheath Use During Flexible Endoscopy

Flexible endoscopes are exposed to blood, mucus, and other secretions during procedures. Single-use sheaths are designed to prevent contact between contaminants and reusable endoscope components. This systematic review examined findings from 22 studies that assessed endoscopic sheath use during urologic, gastrointestinal, or respiratory procedures. The evidence showed that sheaths were durable and yielded faster endoscope turnover times because their reusable components did not require high-level disinfection or sterilization. After a brief learning period, health care providers successfully assembled and maneuvered sheathed endoscopes. Patients generally did not experience greater discomfort during procedures in which sheaths were used. Microbial cultures of sheathed endoscopes were negative or similar to unsheathed endoscopes. More research is needed to evaluate the potential effect of disposable sheaths on infection risks. The evidence suggests that sheaths are a viable option for reliably providing a barrier between endoscopes and patients without affecting the quality of endoscopic procedures.

Portable disposable ultrathin endoscopy tested through percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

BACKGROUND

A portable disposable ultrathin endoscope (DUE) with high visual quality and maneuverability would reduce the need for expensive facilities and emergency endoscopy could be available anywhere. It would increase patient satisfaction, prevent unnecessary sedation, and reduce infection. Our aim was to evaluate the usefulness of portable DUE in performing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients who underwent PEG under DUE guidance and compared them with historical controls who underwent PEG under conventional ultrathin endoscopy (CUE) guidance. The primary outcomes were successful stomach visualization and PEG tube insertion.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (19 male) were enrolled and compared with 25 gender and indication-matched controls. The most common indications for PEG were aspiration due to stroke or brain injury, dementia, and head and neck cancer. Entrance into the stomach was achieved in 92.0% (23/25) and 96% (24/25) in the DUE and CUE groups, and PEG was performed in 91.3% (21/23) and 95.8% (23/24), respectively. The mean insertion time for the DUE and CUE groups were 22.7 ± 9.3 minutes and 17.1 ± 5.7 minutes (P = 0.044). The 3 cases of failure to reach the stomach in both groups were caused by esophageal blockage. The 3 cases of failed PEG tube insertion were caused by poor visualization of the insertion site. Bleeding and pneumoperitoneum occurred in 1 and 2 patients in the DUE group. One case of fever was noted in the CUE group. All adverse events were conservatively managed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that portable DUE in facilities without endoscopy equipment may be clinically feasible.

Disposable sheath that facilitates endoscopic Raman spectroscopy

In vivo endoscopic Raman spectroscopy of human tissue using a fiber optic probe has been previously demonstrated. However, there remain several technical challenges, such as a robust control over the laser radiation dose and measurement repeatability during endoscopy. A decrease in the signal to noise was also observed due to aging of Raman probe after repeated cycles of harsh reprocessing procedures. To address these issues, we designed and tested a disposable, biocompatible, and sterile sheath for use with a fiber optic endoscopic Raman probe. The sheath effectively controls contamination of Raman probes between procedures, greatly reduces turnaround time, and slows down the aging of the Raman probes. A small optical window fitted at the sheath cap maintained the measurement distance between Raman probe end and tissue surface. To ensure that the sheath caused a minimal amount of fluorescence and Raman interference, the optical properties of materials for the sheath, optical window, and bonding agent were studied. The easy-to-use sheath can be manufactured at a moderate cost. The sheath strictly enforced a maximum permissible exposure standard of the tissue by the laser and reduced the spectral variability by 1.5 to 8.5 times within the spectral measurement range.