Posted on 03/10/2015 9:09:15 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
Last week’s story on this topic generated plenty of interest (despite the small number of posted comments), so we continue our coverage…
Yet another prestigious hospital joins the ranks of those reporting Carbapenem resistant enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections, linked to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) endoscopes. On March 4th, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles discovered that four patients were infected with CRE, and 67 others may have been exposed.
Lisa McGiffert, director of the Safe Patient Project at Consumers Union, and a longtime activist regarding hospital-acquired infections, said that “It’s highly likely many hospitals around the country have had outbreaks, and they haven’t been able to connect the dots until this problem was disclosed at UCLA.
It’s just a little late—especially for those who got infections and maybe died as a consequence.” As discussed in last week’s piece, the magic bullet to end this horror seems to be true sterilization of the scopes with ethylene oxide (EtO).
This finding was published on October 8, 2014 in JAMA, in an article entitled “New Delhi Metallo-ß-Lactamase–Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Escherichia coli Associated With Exposure to Duodenoscopes.”
Notably, EtO is hardly new technology, introduced 70-odd years ago. So why, people asked me, are these ERCP scopes not being sterilized with EtO? Good question. In fact, this was one of two questions repeatedly posed to me, via e-mails, phone calls, and from a Boston-based talk show host.
Regarding the non-use of EtO, the answer is cost. EtO sterilization is not expensive per se, but its 10-12 hour cycle time means that more scopes (at nearly $40,000 each) would need to be placed in inventory, to maintain the production flow of the ERCP procedures.
Other reprocessing methods are quicker, but have proven to be less effective. However, in light of the CRE outbreaks,….
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Amazing we live in a time when tattoo parlors are held to higher standards of sterilization than are hospitals.
It can be, there are different types and usages.
My advice, stay out of the hospital.
No, it’s for a procedure to help clear out the gallbladder.
“Endoscope” is short for “esophogogastroduodenoscope” (EGD scope/scopy), endo simply meaning “in”.
Note also this is NOT the standard EGD I get all the time to check down through the stomach (gastro). The titles are a bit misleading.
No.
Diversity of germs.
no....down your throat...
The VA wasn’t properly cleaning their equipment for taking prostate samples a few years back.
If memory serves, didn’t we hear some time ago about similar goings on with the equipment used for colonoscopies?
It is certainly logical to assume that this lackadaisical attitude toward sterilization is not limited to one area.
Don’t know.
But this is very, very specific - ERCP, which is a very specific procedure; as I said, not just any endoscopy. I’d tend to worry more about other endoscopic procedures being tainted before worrying other totallly different areas. It has to get past the stomach to the GB and duodenum, so it’s really the same general location they are working.
Do not know why it is very specific to this procedure.
Probably some illegal passed it off onto an ERCP and it has gone from there....
I read some time back that the “butt” scopes were (in some instances) getting what amounted to a quick wipe (sorry for that ha ha) with alcohol before getting used again.
No, down your throat.
Now we have to balance the chance that an endoscope will find a cancerous lump against the possibility that the it will give one CRE.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.