Efficacy of Disinfection of Rigid Endoscope by Ethyl Alcohol 70%

Abstract

Introduction Currently, there is no safe, affordable, and ecologically-sustainable guideline that helps prevent contamination through endoscopy. We evaluated the safety of intermediate-level disinfection with 70% ethyl alcohol (w/v) based on biological-load recovery from rigid endoscopes after nasal endoscopy.

Objective To demonstrate the efficacy of 70% ethanol in disinfecting rigid endoscopes (REs) to reduce microbial growth in microbiological cultures.

Methods After a nasal endoscopy examination, the endoscope was swabbed with gauze; this served as the positive-control sample. The standard operating procedure for intermediate-level disinfection with 70% ethyl alcohol (w/v) following prior cleaning was applied. The endoscope was again swabbed; this served as the experimental sample. The collected material from the endoscope was extracted from gauze pieces, filtered through a 0.22-μm cellulose membrane, and cultivated in different means of culture.

Results The results revealed a significant difference between the positive-control and experimental groups regarding the presence of Streptococcus coagulase (-) (p < 0.001), Bacillus spp. (p < 0.001), and Staphylococcus aureus (p = 0.001). These microorganisms were detected in the control group, but not in the experimental group.

Conclusions Microorganisms were not recovered from the samples of the experimental group, demonstrating the efficacy and the germicidal action of 70% ethyl alcohol (w/v) as a means of achieving intermediate-level disinfection.

Keywords

detergents - disinfection - endoscopy - ethanol

Financial Disclosure

The authors declare that they have not received any funding pertaining to the present study.

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 23. März 2021

Angenommen: 02. November 2021

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
31. Januar 2022

• References

• 1 Spach DH, Silverstein FE, Stamm WE. Transmission of infection by gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118 (02) 117-128
• 2 Spaulding EH. Chemical disinfection of medical and surgical materials. In: Lawrence C, Block SS. eds. Disinfection, sterilization, and preservation. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1968: 517-531
• 3 McDonnell G, Russell AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev 1999; 12 (01) 147-179
• 4 Rutala WA, Weber DJ. Guideline for disinfection and sterilization in healthcare facilities, 2008. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) [Internet]. 2017 Feb 15 [cited 2017 Oct 20]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/pdf/guidelines/disinfection-guidelines.pdf
• 5 Brasil, Ministério da Saúde, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Resolução - RDC no 15, de 15 de março de 2012. Dispõe sobre requisitos de boas práticas para o processamento de produtos para saúde e dá outras providências [Internet]. [cited 2017 Nov 1]. Available from: http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/anvisa/2012/rdc0015_15_03_2012.html
• 6 Ribeiro SMCP. Reprocessamento de cateteres de angiografia cardiovascular após uso clínico e contaminados artificialmente: avaliação da eficácia da limpeza e da esterilização [thesis]. São Paulo: School of Nursing, University of São Paulo; 2006
• 7 Pinto FMG, de Souza RQ, da Silva CB, Mimica LMJ, Graziano KU. Analysis of the microbial load in instruments used in orthopedic surgeries. Am J Infect Control 2010; 38 (03) 229-233
• 8 United States Pharmacopeia. 25th ed. Rockville: The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. USP 30-NF 25; 2007
• 9 Alvarado CJ, Reichelderfer M. Association for Professionals in Infection Control. APIC guideline for infection prevention and control in flexible endoscopy. Am J Infect Control 2000; 28 (02) 138-155
• 10 Oakley RJ, Khemani S, Prior AJ, Terry RM. Decontamination of flexible nasendoscopes: is a call for guidelines too little too late?. Clin Otolaryngol 2005; 30 (02) 208-209
• 11 Fokkens WJ, Lund VJ, Mullol J. et al. EPOS 2012: European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012. A summary for otorhinolaryngologists. Rhinology 2012; 50 (01) 1-12
• 12 Elackattu A, Zoccoli M, Spiegel JH, Grundfast KM. A comparison of two methods for preventing cross-contamination when using flexible fiberoptic endoscopes in an otolaryngology clinic: disposable sterile sheaths versus immersion in germicidal liquid. Laryngoscope 2010; 120 (12) 2410-2416
• 13 Rutala WA. APIC guideline for selection and use of disinfectants. 1994, 1995, and 1996 APIC Guidelines Committee. Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Am J Infect Control 1996; 24 (04) 313-342
• 14 Chan-Myers H, McAlister D, Antonoplos P. Natural bioburden levels detected on rigid lumened medical devices before and after cleaning. Am J Infect Control 1997; 25 (06) 471-476
• 15 Padoveze MC, Graziano KU. Aspectos conceituais e microbiológicos relacionados ao processamento de materiais utilizados na assistência à saúde. In: Graziano KU, Silva A. Psaltikidis EM, organizers. Enfermagem em centro de materiais e esterilização. São Paulo: Manole; 2010: 22-61
• 16 Padoveze MC. Limpeza, desinfecção e esterilização: aspectos gerais. In: Padoveze MC, Graziano KU. coordinators. Limpeza, desinfecção e esterilização de artigos em serviços de saúde. São Paulo: APECIH; 2010: 1-35
• 17 Liming B, Funnell I, Jones A, Demons S, Marshall K, Harsha W. An evaluation of varying protocols for high-level disinfection of flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopes. Laryngoscope 2014; 124 (11) 2498-2501
• 18 Cavaliere M, Iemma M. Guidelines for reprocessing nonlumened heat-sensitive ear/nose/throat endoscopes. Laryngoscope 2012; 122 (08) 1708-1718
• 19 McDonnell G, Burke P. Disinfection: is it time to reconsider Spaulding?. J Hosp Infect 2011; 78 (03) 163-170