Clinical Endoscopy

Ha Young Oh

1 Article

Comparison on the Efficacy of Disinfectants Used in Automated Endoscope Reprocessors: PHMB-DBAC versus Orthophthalaldehyde: Sun Young Kim, Hong Sik Lee, Jong Jin Hyun, Min Ho Seo, Sun Young Yim, Ha Young Oh, Hye Sook Kim, Bora Keum, Yeon Seok Seo, Yong Sik Kim, Yoon Tae Jeen, Hoon Jai Chun, Soon Ho Um, Chang Duck Kim, Ho Sang Ryu; Clin Endosc 2011;44(2):109-115. Published online December 31, 2011; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2011.44.2.109

Background/Aims

Since endoscopes are reusable apparatus classified as semicritical item, thorough reprocessing to achieve high-level disinfection is of utmost importance to prevent spread of infection. To improve disinfection efficacy and safety, disinfectants and endoscope reprocessors are continuously evolving. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of the combination of polyhexamethylenebiguanide hydrochloride-alkyldimethylbenzylammonium chloride (PHMB-DBAC) and orthophthalaldehyde (OPA) used respectively in ultrasonographic cleaning incorporated automated endoscope reprocessors: COOLENDO (APEX Korea) or OER-A (Olympus Optical).

Methods

A total of 86 flexible upper endoscopes were randomly reprocessed with either COOLENDO/PHMB-DBAC or OER-A/OPA. Culture samplings were done at two sites (endoscope tip and working channel) which were later incubated on blood agar plate. Bacterial colonies were counted and identified.

Results

The culture-positive rate at the endoscope tip and working channel was 0% and 2.33% for COOLENDO/PHMB-DBAC and 4.65% and 0% for OER-A/OPA. Staphylococcus hominis was cultured from one endoscope reprocessed with COOLENDO/PHMB-DBAC and Pseudomonas putida was isolated from two endoscopes reprocessed with OER-A/OPA.

Conclusions

The reprocessing efficacy of COOLENDO/PHMB-DBAC was non-inferior to that of OER-A/OPA (p=0.032; confidence interval, -0.042 to 0.042). During the study period, significant side effect of PHMB-DBAC was not observed.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Recommendations and guidelines for endoscope reprocessing: Current position statement of digestive endoscopic society of Taiwan
Wei-Kuo Chang, Chen-Ling Peng, Yen-Wei Chen, Cheuk-Kay Sun, Chieh-Chang Chen, Tao-Chieh Liu, Yin-Yi Chu, I-Fang Tsai, Chen-Shuan Chung, Hsiao-Fen Lin, Fang-Yu Hsu, Wei-Chen Tai, Hsi-Chang Lee, Hsu-Heng Yen, E-Ming Wang, Shu-Hui Chen, Cheng-Hsin Chu, Ming-
Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection.2024; 57(2): 211. CrossRef
Antibacterial Activity of Tannic Acid and Tannic Acid/Amphiphilic Cationic Polymer Mixtures
Fatimah M. Alzahrani, Stephen G. Yeates, Michelle Webb, Hind Ali Alghamdi
Asian Journal of Chemistry.2020; 32(6): 1491. CrossRef
Antibacterial activity of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm under combined exposure of glutaraldehyde, near-infrared light, and 405-nm laser
Van Nam Tran, Chakradhar Dasagrandhi, Van Gia Truong, Young-Mog Kim, Hyun Wook Kang, Michael R. Hamblin
PLOS ONE.2018; 13(8): e0202821. CrossRef
Comparison of the efficacy of disinfectants in automated endoscope reprocessors for colonoscopes: tertiary amine compound (Sencron2®) versus ortho-phthalaldehyde (Cidex®OPA)
Hyun Il Seo, Dae Sung Lee, Eun Mi Yoon, Min-Jung Kwon, Hyosoon Park, Yoon Suk Jung, Jung Ho Park, Chong Il Sohn, Dong Il Park
Intestinal Research.2016; 14(2): 178. CrossRef
Role of Clinical Endoscopy in Emphasizing Endoscope Disinfection
Ji Kon Ryu, Eun Young Kim, Kwang An Kwon, Il Ju Choi, Ki Baik Hahm
Clinical Endoscopy.2015; 48(5): 351. CrossRef
Recent Update of Gastrointestinal Endoscope Reprocessing
Kyong Hee Hong, Yun Jeong Lim
Clinical Endoscopy.2013; 46(3): 267. CrossRef
Steps of Reprocessing and Equipments
Yong Kook Lee, Jeong Bae Park
Clinical Endoscopy.2013; 46(3): 274. CrossRef
The antibiofilm effects of Byotrol™ G32
N. Govindji, P. Wills, M. Upton, N. Tirelli, S. Yeates, M. Webb
Journal of Applied Microbiology.2013; 114(5): 1285. CrossRef

8,524 View
68 Download
8 Crossref

Author index