These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Manual versus automated methods for cleaning reusable accessory devices used for minimally invasive surgical procedures.
    Author: Alfa MJ, Nemes R.
    Journal: J Hosp Infect; 2004 Sep; 58(1):50-8. PubMed ID: 15350714.
    Abstract:
    We undertook a simulated-use study using quantitative methods to evaluate the cleaning efficacy of ported and non-ported accessory devices used in minimally invasive surgery. We chose laparoscopic scissors and forceps to represent worst-case devices which were inoculated with artificial test soil containing 10(6) cfu/mL Enterococcus faecalis and Geobacillus stearothermophilus and allowed to dry for 1 h. Cleaning was performed manually, as well as by the automated SI-Auto Narrow lumen cleaner. Manual cleaning left two- to 50-fold more soil residuals (protein, haemoglobin and carbohydrate) inside the lumen of non-ported versus ported laparoscopic accessory devices. The SI-Auto Narrow lumen cleaner was more efficient than manual cleaning and achieved >99% reduction in soil parameters in both non-ported (using retro-flushing) and ported laparoscopic devices. Only the automated cleaning of ported devices achieved 10(3)-10(4)-fold reduction in bacterial numbers. Sonication alone (no flushing of inner channel) did not effectively remove soil or organisms from the inner channel. Our findings indicate that non-ported accessory devices cannot be as reliably cleaned as ported devices regardless of the cleaning method used. If non-ported accessory devices are reprocessed, they should be cleaned using retro-flushing in an automated narrow lumen cleaner.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]