Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2022; 10(09): E1275-E1281
DOI: 10.1055/a-1897-5000
Original article

No relation between adenosine triphosphate after manual cleaning and presence of microorganisms on endoscopes after automated high-level disinfection

Judith A. Kwakman
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
2   Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
,
Arjan W. Rauwers
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
2   Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
,
Jolanda G. Buijs
3   Qualtity Assurance and Regulatory Affairs Office Medical Devices, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
,
Woutrinus de Groot
2   Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
,
Margreet C. Vos‡
2   Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
,
Marco J. Bruno‡
1   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
› Author AffiliationsSupported by: 3M Health Care EM-05-296902
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) tests are increasingly used to detect biological material; however, their reliability to detect bacterial contamination in endoscopes is not proven. We investigated the predictive value of ATP tests after manual cleaning for presence or absence of microorganisms as shown by culture after automated high-level disinfection (HLD) in duodenoscopes and linear echoendoscopes (DLEs).

Patients and methods After manual cleaning, ATP tests were performed on swab samples taken from the detachable cap and forceps elevator, and on flush samples of the DLE working channels. These results were compared to the growth of any microorganisms in cultures acquired after automated HLD. ATP tests with > 200 relative light units (RLU) were considered positive. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare the RLU levels with microbial presence in cultures.

Results In total, 903 procedures were performed involving 26 distinct DLEs. Depending on sample site, 20.8 % (cap) to 63.8 % (channel brush) of the ATP negative samples were accompanied by positive post-HLD cultures. 54.4 % of the cap samples with a positive culture (growth of any kind of microorganism) and 91.8 % of the channel samples with a positive culture had a negative ATP test after manual cleaning. ROC curves per sample site, DLE type and microorganism type all had area under the curves below 0.6.

Conclusions In our study, ATP tests performed after manual cleaning could not predict presence or absence of microorganisms after automated HLD as shown by culture. More than half of the positive cultures were preceded by a negative ATP test.



Publication History

Received: 06 May 2022

Accepted after revision: 08 July 2022

Article published online:
14 September 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Rauwers AW, Voor Inʼt Holt AF, Buijs JG. et al. Nationwide risk analysis of duodenoscope and linear echoendoscope contamination. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 681-691.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rauwers AW, Voor Inʼt Holt AF, Buijs JG. et al. High prevalence rate of digestive tract bacteria in duodenoscopes: a nationwide study. Gut 2018; 67: 1637-1645
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 McCafferty CE, Aghajani MJ, Abi-Hanna D. et al. An update on gastrointestinal endoscopy-associated infections and their contributing factors. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 2018; 17: 36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chapman CG, Siddiqui UD, Manzano M. et al. Risk of infection transmission in curvilinear array echoendoscopes: results of a prospective reprocessing and culture registry. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 390-397 e391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Beilenhoff U, Neumann CS, Rey JF. et al. ESGE-ESGENA guideline for quality assurance in reprocessing: microbiological surveillance testing in endoscopy. Endoscopy 2007; 39: 175-181
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hansen D, Benner D, Hilgenhöner M. et al. ATP measurement as method to monitor the quality of reprocessing flexible endoscopes. Ger Med Sci 2004; 2: Doc04
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Batailler P, Saviuc P, Picot-Gueraud R. et al. Usefulness of adenosinetriphosphate bioluminescence assay (ATPmetry) for monitoring the reprocessing of endoscopes. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015; 36: 1437-1443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Alfa MJ, Fatima I, Olson N. Validation of adenosine triphosphate to audit manual cleaning of flexible endoscope channels. Am J Infect Control 2013; 41: 245-248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Olafsdottir LB, Whelan J, Snyder GM. A systematic review of adenosine triphosphate as a surrogate for bacterial contamination of duodenoscopes used for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Am J Infect Control 2018; 46: 697-705
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Visrodia K, Hanada Y, Pennington KM. et al. Duodenoscope reprocessing surveillance with adenosine triphosphate testing and terminal cultures: a clinical pilot study. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 180-186
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Sethi S, Huang RJ, Barakat MT. et al. Adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence for bacteriologic surveillance and reprocessing strategies for minimizing risk of infection transmission by duodenoscopes. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 1180-1187 e1181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kenters N, Tartari E, Hopman J. et al. Worldwide practices on flexible endoscope reprocessing. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2018; 7: 153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chang WK, Liu TC, Liu TL. et al. Enhanced manual cleaning efficacy of duodenoscope in endoscopy units: Results of a multicenter comprehensive quality control program. Am J Infect Control 2019; 47: 1233-1239
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Quan E, Mahmood R, Naik A. et al. Use of adenosine triphosphate to audit reprocessing of flexible endoscopes with an elevator mechanism. Am J Infect Control 2018; 46: 1272-1277
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rauwers AW, Voor In 't Holt AF, Buijs JG. et al. Assessment of post-manual cleaning adenosine triphosphate tests to prevent the use of contaminated duodenoscopes and linear echoendoscopes: the DETECT study. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96: 282-290.e5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Alfa MJ, Olson N, Murray BL. Comparison of clinically relevant benchmarks and channel sampling methods used to assess manual cleaning compliance for flexible gastrointestinal endoscopes. Am J Infect Control 2014; 42: e1-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Dutch Association for Medical Microbiology. Guideline control of microbiological safety of thermolabile flexible high-risk gastrointestinal endoscopes. https://www.nvmm.nl/media/2222/180627-richtlijn-controle-op-microbiologische-veiligheid-van-thermolabiele-flexibele-gi-endoscopen-juiste-versie.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Larsen S, Russell RV, Ockert LK. et al. Rate and impact of duodenoscope contamination: A systematic review and meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicin 2020; 25: 100451
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ridtitid W, Pakvisal P, Chatsuwan T. et al. Performance characteristics and optimal cut-off value of triple adenylate nucleotides test versus adenosine triphosphate test as point of care testing for predicting inadequacy of duodenoscope reprocessing. J Hosp Infect 2020; 106: 348-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Fernando G, Collignon P, Beckingham W. ATP bioluminescence to validate the decontamination process of gastrointestinal endoscopes. Healthcare infection 2014; 19: 59-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Fushimi R, Takashina M, Yoshikawa H. et al. Comparison of adenosine triphosphate, microbiological load, and residual protein as indicators for assessing the cleanliness of flexible gastrointestinal endoscopes. Am J Infect Control 2013; 41: 161-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Washburn RE, Pietsch JJ. Assessment of test methods for evaluating effectiveness of cleaning flexible endoscopes. Am J Infect Control 2018; 46: 685-688
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Cattoir L, Vanzieleghem T, Florin L. et al. Surveillance of endoscopes: Comparison of different sampling techniques. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017; 38: 1062-1069
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ji X-Y, Ning P-Y, Fei C-N. et al. The importance of sampling technique and rinse water for assessing flexible gastrointestinal endoscope reprocessing: A 3-year study covering 59 centers. Am J Infect Control 2020; 48: 19-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 McCafferty CE, Abi-Hanna D, Aghajani MJ. et al. The validity of adenosine triphosphate measurement in detecting endoscope contamination. J Hosp Infect 2018; 100: e142-e145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Perumpail RB, Marya NB, McGinty BL. et al. Endoscope reprocessing: Comparison of drying effectiveness and microbial levels with an automated drying and storage cabinet with forced filtered air and a standard storage cabinet. Am J Infect Control 2019; 47: 1083-1089
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Pineau L, Villard E, Duc DL. et al. Endoscope drying/storage cabinet: interest and efficacy. J Hosp Infect 2008; 68: 59-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Alfa MJ. Quality systems approach for endoscope reprocessing: You donʼt know what you don't know!. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2020; 30: 693-709
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar