TY - JOUR
T1 - Novel single-use duodenoscope compared with 3 models of reusable duodenoscopes for ERCP
T2 - a randomized bench-model comparison
AU - Ross, Andrew S.
AU - Bruno, Marco J.
AU - Kozarek, Richard A.
AU - Petersen, Bret T.
AU - Pleskow, Douglas K.
AU - Sejpal, Divyesh V.
AU - Slivka, Adam
AU - Moore, Dale
AU - Panduro, Karina
AU - Peetermans, Joyce A.
AU - Insull, Jeffrey
AU - Rousseau, Matthew J.
AU - Tirrell, Gregory P.
AU - Muthusamy, V. Raman
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors acknowledge the contributions by Boston Scientific Corporation employee Margaret Gourlay, MD, MPH, in preparation of the manuscript, by William S. Harmsen, MS, for independently confirming the data analysis, and by James Weldon for the photos in Figures 1 and 2. The data analytic methods and study materials for this study may be made available to other researchers in accordance with the Boston Scientific Data Sharing Policy (http://www.bostonscientific.com/en-US/data-sharing-requests.html).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
PY - 2020/2
Y1 - 2020/2
N2 - Background and Aims: Multidrug-resistant infectious outbreaks associated with duodenoscope reuse have been documented internationally. A single-use endoscope could eliminate exogenous patient-to-patient infection associated with ERCP. Methods: We conducted a comparative bench simulation study of a new single-use and 3 models of reusable duodenoscopes on a synthetic anatomic bench model. Four ERCP tasks were performed: guidewire locking (single-use and 1 reusable duodenoscope only), plastic stent placement and removal, metal stent placement and removal, and basket sweeping. The study schedule included block randomization by 4 duodenoscopes, 4 tasks, and 2 anatomic model ERCP stations. Ability to complete tasks, task completion times, and subjective ratings of overall performance, navigation/pushability, tip control, and image quality on a scale of 1 (worst) to 10 (best) were compared among duodenoscopes. Results: All 4 ERCP tasks (total 14 subtasks) were completed by 6 expert endoscopists using all 4 duodenoscopes, with similar task completion times (median, 1.5-8.0 minutes per task) and overall performance ratings by task (median, 8.0-10.0). Navigation/pushability ratings were lower for the single-use duodenoscope than for the 3 reusable duodenoscopes (median, 8.0, 10.0, 9.0, and 9.0, respectively; P <.01). Tip control ratings were similar among all the duodenoscopes (median, 9.0-10.0; P =.77). Image quality ratings were lower for 1 reusable duodenoscope compared with the single-use and other 2 reusable duodenoscopes (median, 8.0, 9.0, 9.0, and 9.0, respectively; P <.01). Conclusions: A new single-use duodenoscope was used to simulate 4 ERCP tasks in an anatomic model, with performance ratings and completion times comparable with 3 models of reusable duodenoscopes.
AB - Background and Aims: Multidrug-resistant infectious outbreaks associated with duodenoscope reuse have been documented internationally. A single-use endoscope could eliminate exogenous patient-to-patient infection associated with ERCP. Methods: We conducted a comparative bench simulation study of a new single-use and 3 models of reusable duodenoscopes on a synthetic anatomic bench model. Four ERCP tasks were performed: guidewire locking (single-use and 1 reusable duodenoscope only), plastic stent placement and removal, metal stent placement and removal, and basket sweeping. The study schedule included block randomization by 4 duodenoscopes, 4 tasks, and 2 anatomic model ERCP stations. Ability to complete tasks, task completion times, and subjective ratings of overall performance, navigation/pushability, tip control, and image quality on a scale of 1 (worst) to 10 (best) were compared among duodenoscopes. Results: All 4 ERCP tasks (total 14 subtasks) were completed by 6 expert endoscopists using all 4 duodenoscopes, with similar task completion times (median, 1.5-8.0 minutes per task) and overall performance ratings by task (median, 8.0-10.0). Navigation/pushability ratings were lower for the single-use duodenoscope than for the 3 reusable duodenoscopes (median, 8.0, 10.0, 9.0, and 9.0, respectively; P <.01). Tip control ratings were similar among all the duodenoscopes (median, 9.0-10.0; P =.77). Image quality ratings were lower for 1 reusable duodenoscope compared with the single-use and other 2 reusable duodenoscopes (median, 8.0, 9.0, 9.0, and 9.0, respectively; P <.01). Conclusions: A new single-use duodenoscope was used to simulate 4 ERCP tasks in an anatomic model, with performance ratings and completion times comparable with 3 models of reusable duodenoscopes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074400142&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074400142&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2019.08.032
DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2019.08.032
M3 - Article
C2 - 31679738
AN - SCOPUS:85074400142
SN - 0016-5107
VL - 91
SP - 396
EP - 403
JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
IS - 2
ER -