Infection control in ERCP using a duodenoscope with a disposable cap (ICECAP): rationale for and design of a randomized controlled trial

Detection of Burkholderia gladioli in contaminated ultrasonic coupling agent

BACKGROUND

In July 2023, Burkholderia gladioli was detected in a patient's ascites specimen. This pathogen had not been detected in the hospital for nearly 3 years. Therefore, an investigation was immediately launched.

METHODS

Microbial environmental hygiene samples were collected from the operating room environment, the ultrasonic probe, and ultrasonic coupling agents in the interventional ultrasound department. The quantitative method was used to culture and identify bacterial species. Average Nucleotide Identity was used to compare the similarity of all orthologous protein-coding genes between pairwise genomes.

RESULTS

The antimicrobial susceptibility spectrum of B. gladioli isolated from the coupling agent was consistent with that of strains isolated from the patient sample. The two isolates were the same clone and 100% identical according to ANI. The qualified rate of non-sterile coupling agent was 18.37%; sterile coupling agents were 100% qualified. With contaminated and qualified ultrasonic coupling agent, the number of bacteria exceeding the standard rate was 88.00% and 56.00%, respectively. The qualified rate of total bacterial count of the ultrasonic probe disinfected with disinfectant wipes or ultraviolet light reached 90% or 100%, respectively. The rate of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae detected on the bedside ultrasound machine was 13.04% (6/46).

CONCLUSION

In this case, we identified contaminated ultrasonic coupling agent and irregular use of non-sterile coupling agent. To avoid coupling agent contamination, monitoring and routine cleaning of the ultrasonic examination environment are crucial. Robust environmental testing and epidemiological investigation, along with early identification of uncommon bacteria using information system monitoring, are essential to contain an outbreak.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

Not applicable.

Adverse events, success, and tolerability of biliary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with conscious sedation vs anaesthesia: a multi-centre prospective study

Background and Aims

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is performed using anaesthesia or conscious sedation, though the effectiveness, adverse events (AEs), and tolerability of each approach remain unclear. Thus, we compared these approaches prospectively.

Methods

We performed a multi-centre prospective cohort study including patients with native papillae undergoing ERCP for biliary indications between 2018 and 2023. The primary outcome was sedation-related AEs, defined as sustained hypoxaemia or hypotension, unplanned mask ventilation or intubation, vasopressor or reversal agent use, cardiorespiratory arrest, or death. Secondary outcomes included other AEs, technical success measures, and patient-reported tolerability using a validated scale. Multivariable logistic regression was performed in addition to propensity score-matched analyses.

Results

At 8 centres, a total of 3174 first-time biliary ERCPs were performed, 433 (13.6%) employing anaesthesia. Nine sedation-related AEs occurred with conscious sedation (0.3%), while 2 (0.5%) occurred with anaesthesia (odds ratio, OR, 0.35, 0.07-2.37). Only 25 (0.9%) conscious sedation-supported ERCPs were aborted due to the inability to appropriately sedate patients. There were no significant differences in other AE rates, cannulation success, time, or attempts, use of pre-cut or needle-knife access methods, or inadvertent pancreatic duct cannulation. Odds of significant patient-reported intra-procedural awareness and discomfort were both higher with conscious sedation (ORs 16.19, 4.81-54.53, and 21.25, 4.44-101.61, respectively). Propensity score-matched analyses yielded no differences in any outcome compared with primary analyses.

Conclusions

Routine biliary ERCP is equally safe and effective with conscious sedation (vs anaesthesia). Given regional resource limitations, conscious sedation is justified as a primary option for routine biliary ERCP.

Use patterns, technical challenges, and patient selection associated with single-use duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with single-use endcaps in the United States and Canada

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The extent of adoption, patient selection, and use patterns of single-use duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with single-use endcaps have not yet been characterized, and large-scale assessments of endoscopist-reported function and challenges have not been reported.

METHODS

An anonymous 6-minute electronic survey assessing use and experience with single-use duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with novel design features was distributed to U.S. and Canadian endoscopy centers, and responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The survey was notable for a 70.2% response rate, with representation from academic (68.9%), community (18%), and veterans affairs (8.2%) centers. Most institutions used standard reprocessable duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with single-use endcaps (34.4%) or a mix of standard reprocessable duodenoscopes, duodenoscopes with single-use endcaps, and single-use duodenoscopes (29.5%). No center used only single-use duodenoscopes. Some institutions (10.3%) planned to transition to duodenoscopes with a single-use endcap, 10.3% to a mix of single-use duodenoscopes and duodenoscopes with a single-use endcap, and 1.7% to single-use duodenoscopes alone. Challenges were reported with each type of novel duodenoscope, and selection patterns for use were characterized.

CONCLUSIONS

This first of its kind, large-scale survey of use patterns and functionality of newly introduced duodenoscopes is notable for the fairly widespread use of duodenoscopes with single-use endcaps and more limited use of single-use duodenoscopes. Both novel duodenoscope designs are associated with mechanical limitations that respondents indicate represent challenges to successful completion of ERCPs.

Single-use Duodenoscope: The Cleaner Standard

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the gold standard in the endoscopic management of biliary disease. An average of 700,000 ERCPs are performed every year, and most are performed using a reusable flexible duodenoscope. The innovation of disposable duodenoscopes has changed the dynamic in the advanced endoscopy field of study to primarily reduce or eliminate the risk of cross-contamination between patients. Many factors affect whether institutions can convert from standard reusable duodenoscopes to single-use duodenoscopes including the cost of the devices, reimbursement from insurance companies for the new devices, and the overall environmental impact. However, the reduction of cross-contamination leading to active infection in patients, environmental waste produced with high-level disinfection procedures, staff and equipment required for reprocessing, and the inability to frequently upgrade duodenoscopes for optimal performance are all factors that favor transitioning to single-use duodenoscopes. As these devices are new to the field of gastroenterology, the purpose of this review is to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of transitioning to single-use devices and a brief mention of alternative options for institutions unable to make this change.

Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of early endoscopic treatment of Acute biliary pancreatitis based on lightweight deep learning model

BACKGROUND

Acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) is a clinical common acute abdomen. After the first pancreatitis, relapse rate is high, which seriously affects human life and health and causes great economic burdens to family and society. According to a great many research findings, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an effective treatment method. However, whether ERCP should be performed in early stage of ABP is still controversial in clinical practice.

METHODS

Related articles were retrieved from Pubmed, Web of Science core library, Nature, Science Direct, and other databases published from January 2000 until now. The keywords included early ERCP, delayed ERCP, ABP, laparoscopy, and cholecystectomy, all which were connected by "or" and "and". The language of articles was not restricted during the retrieval and Review Manager5.3 was employed to perform meta-analysis of experimental data. Finally, a total of 8 eligible articles were selected, including 8,801 patients.

RESULTS

The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated that no remarkable differences were detected in the incidence of complications, mortality, and operation time between patients undergoing ERCP in early stage and those receiving delayed ERCP. However, the hospitalization time of patients in experimental group was notably shorter than that among patients in control group.

CONCLUSINS

Early ERCP treatment is as safe as late ERCP treatment for biliary pancreatitis, and can significantly shorten the hospital stay. Hence, the therapy was worthy of clinical promotion. The research findings provided reference and basis for clinical treatment of relevant diseases.

Disposable Gastrointestinal Scopes: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopes are an essential tool in the diagnosis, screening, and treatment of gastrointestinal diseases. In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration issued a news release, recommending that duodenoscope manufacturers and health care facilities phase out fully reusable duodenoscopes with fixed endcaps in lieu of duodenoscopes that are either fully disposable or those that contain disposable endcaps. With this study, we systematically reviewed the published literature on single-use disposable gastrointestinal scopes to describe the current state of the literature and provide summary recommendations on the role of disposable gastrointestinal endoscopes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For our inclusion criteria, we searched for studies that were published in the year 2015 and afterward. We performed a literature search in PubMed using the keywords, "disposable," "reusable," "choledochoscope," "colonoscope," "duodenoscope," "esophagoscope," "gastroscope," and "sigmoidoscope." After our review, we identified our final article set, including 13 articles relating to disposable scopes, published from 2015 to 2023.

RESULTS

In this review, we show 13 articles discussing the infection rate, functionality, safety, and affordability of disposable gastrointestinal scopes in comparison to reusable gastrointestinal scopes. Of the 3 articles that discussed infection rates (by Forbes and colleagues, Ridtitid and colleagues, and Ofosu and colleagues), each demonstrated a decreased risk of infection in disposable gastrointestinal scopes. Functionality was another common theme among these articles. Six articles (by Muthusamy and colleagues, Bang and colleagues, Lisotti and colleagues, Ross and colleagues, Kang and colleagues, and Forbes and colleagues) demonstrated comparable functionality of disposable scopes to reusable scopes. The most reported functionality issue in disposable scopes was decreased camera resolution. Disposable scopes also showed comparable safety profiles compared with reusable scopes. Six articles (by Kalipershad and colleagues, Muthusamy and colleagues, Bang and colleagues, Lisotti and colleagues, Luo and colleagues, and Huynh and colleagues) showed comparable rates of AEs, whereas 1 article (by Ofosu and colleagues) demonstrated increased rates of AEs with disposable scopes. Lastly, a cost analysis was looked at in 3 of the articles. Two articles (by Larsen et al and Ross and colleagues) remarked that further research is needed to understand the cost of disposable scopes, whereas 1 article (by Kang and colleagues) showed a favorable cost analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

After a review of the literature published since the 2015 Food and Drug Administration safety communication, disposable scopes have been shown to be effective in decreasing infection risks while maintaining similar safety profiles to conventional reusable scopes. However, more research is required to compare disposable and reusable scopes in terms of functionality and cost-effectiveness.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound endoscope reprocessing: Variables impacting contamination risk

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate variables that affect risk of contamination for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound endoscopes.

DESIGN

Observational, quality improvement study.

SETTING

University medical center with a gastrointestinal endoscopy service performing ∼1,000 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and ∼1,000 endoscopic ultrasound endoscope procedures annually.

METHODS

Duodenoscope and linear echoendoscope sampling (from the elevator mechanism and instrument channel) was performed from June 2020 through September 2021. Operational changes during this period included standard reprocessing with high-level disinfection with ethylene oxide gas sterilization (HLD-ETO) was switched to double high-level disinfection (dHLD) (June 16, 2020-July 15, 2020), and duodenoscopes changed to disposable tip model (March 2021). The frequency of contamination for the co-primary outcomes were characterized by calculated risk ratios.

RESULTS

The overall pathogenic contamination rate was 4.72% (6 of 127). Compared to duodenoscopes, linear echoendoscopes had a contamination risk ratio of 3.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-19.1). Reprocessing using HLD-ETO was associated with a contamination risk ratio of 0.29 (95% CI, 0.06-1.54). Linear echoendoscopes undergoing dHLD had the highest risk of contamination (2 of 18, 11.1%), and duodenoscopes undergoing HLD-ETO and the lowest risk of contamination (0 of 53, 0%). Duodenoscopes with a disposable tip had a 0% contamination rate (0 of 27).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not detect a significant reduction in endoscope contamination using HLD-ETO versus dHLD reprocessing. Linear echoendoscopes have a risk of contamination similar to that of duodenoscopes. Disposable tips may reduce the risk of duodenoscope contamination.

Transmission of oral microbiota to the biliary tract during endoscopic retrograde cholangiography

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) possesses a translocation risk of microbes to the biliary system. We studied bile contamination during ERC and its impact on patients' outcome in a real-life-situation.

METHODS

Ninety-nine ERCs were analyzed and microbial samples were taken from the throat before and from bile during ERC and from irrigation fluid of the duodenoscope before and after ERC.

RESULTS

91.2% of cholangitis patients had detectable microbes in the bile (sensitivity 91%), but the same was true for 86.2% in the non-cholangitis group. Bacteroides fragilis (p=0.015) was significantly associated with cholangitis. In 41.7% of ERCs with contaminated endoscopes these microbes were found in the bile after the procedure. Analysis of duodenoscopes' irrigation liquid after ERC matched the microbial bile analysis of these patients in 78.8%. Identical microbial species were in throat and in bile samples of the same ERC in 33% of all cases and in 45% in the non-cholangitis group. Transmission of microbes to the biliary tract did not result in more frequent cholangitis, longer hospital stays, or worse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

During ERC bile samples are regularly contaminated with microbes of the oral cavity but it did not affect clinical outcome.

Effect of Disposable Elevator Cap Duodenoscopes on Persistent Microbial Contamination and Technical Performance of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: The ICECAP Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Infection transmission following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) can occur due to persistent contamination of duodenoscopes despite high-level disinfection to completely eliminate microorganisms on the instrument.

Objective

To determine (1) contamination rates after high-level disinfection and (2) technical performance of duodenoscopes with disposable elevator caps compared with those with standard designs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this parallel-arm multicenter randomized clinical trial at 2 tertiary ERCP centers in Canada, all patients 18 years and older and undergoing ERCP for any indication were eligible.

Intervention

The intervention was use of duodenoscopes with disposable elevator caps compared with duodenoscopes with a standard design.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Coprimary outcomes were persistent microbial contamination of the duodenoscope elevator or channel, defined as growth of at least 10 colony-forming units of any organism or any growth of gram-negative bacteria following high-level disinfection (superiority outcome), and technical success of ERCP according to a priori criteria (noninferiority outcome with an a priori noninferiority margin of 7%), assessed by blinded reviewers.

Results

From December 2019 to February 2022, 518 patients were enrolled (259 disposable elevator cap duodenoscopes, 259 standard duodenoscopes). Patients had a mean (SD) age of 60.7 (17.0) years and 258 (49.8%) were female. No significant differences were observed between study groups, including in ERCP difficulty. Persistent microbial contamination was detected in 11.2% (24 of 214) of standard duodenoscopes and 3.8% (8 of 208) of disposable elevator cap duodenoscopes (P = .004), corresponding to a relative risk of 0.34 (95% CI, 0.16-0.75) and number needed to treat of 13.6 (95% CI, 8.1-42.7) to avoid persistent contamination. Technical success using the disposable cap scope was noninferior to that of the standard scope (94.6% vs 90.7%, P = .13). There were no differences between study groups in adverse events and other secondary outcomes.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, disposable elevator cap duodenoscopes exhibited reduced contamination following high-level disinfection compared with standard scope designs, without affecting the technical performance and safety of ERCP.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04040504.

Device profile of the EXALT Model D single-use duodenoscope for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: overview of its safety and efficacy

Introduction: The management of pancreaticobiliary disorders relies heavily on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, which is performed with a duodenoscope. Bacterial colonization of reusable duodenoscopes leading to subsequent infectious outbreaks is well recognized and remains an issue despite efforts to optimize best practices in high-level disinfection. The EXALT Model D duodenoscope (EXALT) (Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, MA) is a single-use device, designed to achieve technical equivalency with reusable devices while eliminating the potential for device-related outbreaks.Areas covered: This review covers the challenges associated with reprocessing duodenoscopes and the development of duodenoscope-related infections, with an emphasis on the use of single-use duodenoscopes as a potential solution to this issue.Expert Opinion: Duodenoscope-related infections are an increasingly recognized problem. Infectious outbreaks harm patients, significantly affect providers and medical centers, and can erode patient trust in the health-care system. Single-use duodenoscopes eliminate both the risk of device-related infection transmission and the need for burdensome duodenoscope reprocessing. In clinical evaluations, the EXALT device has demonstrated an equivalent technical performance and provider satisfaction compared to reusable duodenoscopes. Increasing use of this device will clarify how it compares to reusable duodenoscopes in a variety of clinical settings among endoscopists of varying skills levels.

Characteristics and Outcomes of ERCP at a Canadian Tertiary Centre: Initial Results from a Prospective High-Fidelity Biliary Endoscopy Registry

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an essential procedure in the management of pancreatic and biliary disease. While its role is firmly established, further well-designed prospective ERCP research is required, as a large portion of previous work has employed retrospective or administrative methodologies, both prone to potential biases. The aim of the Calgary Registry for Advanced and Therapeutic Endoscopy (CReATE) is to be a high-fidelity prospective multicentre registry.

METHODS

The study population consisted of consecutive adult ERCP patients from September 2018 to September 2019. Informed consent was acquired for each patient. All relevant preprocedural, procedural, peri-procedural and postprocedural data were captured in real time by a full-time third-party research assistant directly observing procedures. Outcomes were ascertained by comprehensive medical record review and patient phone interview 30 days after the index procedure.

RESULTS

Five endoscopists performed 895 ERCP procedures, 90.1% of which were deemed successful. Suspected choledocholithiasis was the most common indication for ERCP, followed by suspected or confirmed stricture(s), at 61.0% and 29.5%, respectively. 61.0% of procedures were performed on ERCP-naive patients. Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred following 4.9% of procedures, with clinically significant bleeding or perforation occurring following 1.8% and 0.1% of procedures, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Through 12 months, CReATE captured 895 procedures prospectively, with each entry containing over 300 data fields. Active expansion to additional tertiary centres is underway, and this will enhance the existing data pool. CReATE has the potential to improve multiple facets of ERCP, including training, optimal procedural techniques, mitigation of adverse events and personalized patient care.

Recent Advances in Endoscope Disinfection: Where Do We Stand in the COVID era?

Over 16 million cases worldwide, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has profoundly affected healthcare as we know it. Given reports of gastrointestinal involvement and viral shedding in the stool, it is unsurprising there are concerns that endoscopic equipment may be a potential vector of viral transmission. Here, we provide an overview of existing practices for endoscope reprocessing, recent developments in the field, and challenges in the COVID-19 environment. Current multi-society guidelines do not advise any change to endoscope disinfection protocols but emphasize strict adherence to recommended practices. However, endoscopy reprocessing staff may benefit from supplemental personal protective equipment measures, especially in high risk situations. Because thorough endoscope reprocessing is highly operator dependent, adequate training of personnel is critical for proper manual cleaning and disinfection of endoscopes that have potential to harbor virus. Bacterial contamination of duodenoscopes has caused outbreaks of infection from multidrug-resistant organisms, highlighting vulnerable areas. The emphasis of current studies is on optimization of disinfection and drying, minimization of simethicone use, and on quality control of endoscope reprocessing with sampling and microbiological culturing. Recent advances include novel approaches to endoscope sterilization, infection barrier methods, and design of partially or fully disposable duodenoscopes. Overall, the available data indicate that, when correctly executed, current reprocessing practices are sufficient in preventing SARS-COV-2 transmission.

Bilio-pancreatic endoscopy during COVID-19 pandemic

On 31 December 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology detected in Wuhan (Hubei Province of China). In January 2020, a new coronavirus named SARS-CoV2 was isolated and, since that time, SARS-CoV2 related disease (COVID-19) rapidly spread all over the world becoming pandemic in March 2020. The COVID-19 outbreak dramatically affected the public-health and the health-care facilities organization. Bilio-pancreatic endoscopy is considered a high-risk procedure for cross-contamination and, even though it is not directly involved in COVID-19 diagnosis and management, its reorganization is crucial to guarantee high standards of care minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV2 transmission among patients and health-care providers. Bilio-pancreatic endoscopic procedures often require a short physical distance between the endoscopist and the patient for a long period of time, a frequent exchange of devices, the involvement of a large number of personnel, the use of complex endoscopes difficult to reprocess. On this basis, endoscopic units should take precautions with adjusted management of bilio-pancreatic endoscopy. The aim of this article is to discuss the approach to bilio-pancreatic endoscopy in the COVID-19 era with focus on diagnostic algorithms, indications, management of the endoscopic room, proper use of Personal Protective Equipment and correct reprocessing of instrumentation.