title: Endoscope storage time: assessment of microbial colonization up to 21 days after reprocessing.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Insufficient data exist for how long endoscopes can be stored after reprocessing. Concern about possible microbial colonization has led to various recommendations for reprocessing intervals among institutions, with many as short as 5 days. A significant cost savings could be realized if it can be demonstrated that endoscopes may be stored for as long as 21 days without risk of clinically significant contamination.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To demonstrate whether flexible endoscopes may be stored for as long as 21 days after reprocessing without colonization by pathogenic microbes.
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective, observational study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Tertiary care center.
  Four duodenoscopes, 4 colonoscopes, and 2 gastroscopes.
  
  
  METHODS
  Microbial testing of endoscope channels.
  
  
  METHODS
  Culture results at days 0, 7, 14, and 21.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were 33 positive cultures from 28 of the 96 sites tested (29.2% overall contamination rate). Twenty-nine of 33 isolates were typical skin or environmental contaminants, thus clinically insignificant. Four potential pathogens were cultured, including Enterococcus, Candida parapsilosis, α-hemolytic Streptococcus, and Aureobasidium pullulans; all were likely clinically insignificant as each was only recovered at 1 time point at 1 site, and all grew in low concentrations. There were no definite pathogenic isolates.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Single center.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Endoscopes can be stored for as long as 21 days after standard reprocessing with a low risk of pathogenic microbial colonization. Extension of reprocessing protocols to 21 days could effect significant cost savings.
authors.affiliation: Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: Andrew S
authors.initials: AS
authors.lastname: Brock
authors.affiliation: Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: Lisa L
authors.initials: LL
authors.lastname: Steed
authors.affiliation: Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: Janice
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Freeman
authors.affiliation: Department of Quality Management and Patient Safety/Infection Control, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: Bernadette
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Garry
authors.affiliation: Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: Phyllis
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Malpas
authors.affiliation: Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Cotton
mesh_terms: D002175:Candida / Q000302:isolation & purification; D015169:Colony Count, Microbial; D017046:Cost Savings / Q000379:methods; D019723:Endoscopes / Q000382:microbiology*; D016983:Enterococcus / Q000302:isolation & purification; D004866:Equipment Contamination / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013291:Streptococcus / Q000302:isolation & purification; D013997:Time Factors