Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T03:51:25.351Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of Ultraviolet C for Disinfection of Endocavitary Ultrasound Transducers Persistently Contaminated despite Probe Covers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Guillaume Kac ,
Isabelle Podglajen ,
Ali Si-Mohamed ,
Aurelia Rodi ,
Christine Grataloup  and
Guy Meyer
Guillaume Kac
Affiliation:
Hygiène Hospitalière, Paris, France
Isabelle Podglajen
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Paris, France Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou and, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
Ali Si-Mohamed
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Virologie, Paris, France
Aurelia Rodi
Affiliation:
Hygiène Hospitalière, Paris, France
Christine Grataloup
Affiliation:
Service de Radiologie, Paris, France
Guy Meyer*
Affiliation:
Service de Pneumologie, Paris, France Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou and, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
*
Hygiène Hospitalière, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, 20 rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Objective.

To determine the rate of bacterial and viral contamination of endocavitary ultrasound probes after endorectal or endovaginal examination with the use of probe covers and to evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy of a disinfection procedure consisting of cleaning with a disinfectant-impregnated towel followed by disinfection with ultraviolet C (UVC) light.

Methods.

Endovaginal or endorectal ultrasound examinations were performed for 440 patients in 3 institutions. All probes were covered by a condom or sheath during the examination. For bacterial analysis, 1 swab was applied lengthwise across one-half the surface of the probe just after removal of the probe cover. The second swab was similarly applied over the probe immediately after the end of a 2-step process consisting of cleaning with a towel impregnated with a disinfectant spray and a 5-minute UVC disinfection cycle. Swabs were applied onto plates and incubated for 48 hours. The number of colony-forming units was counted, and organisms were identified. A similar protocol was used for viral detection of Epstein-Barr virus, human cytomegalovirus, and human papillomavirus, except that an additional swab was applied along the entire external surface of the probe cover before its removal. Viruses were detected by means of a polymerase chain reaction-based protocol.

Results.

After removal of probe covers, contamination by pathogenic bacteria was found for 15 (3.4% [95% confidence interval, 2.0%-5.6%]) of 440 probes, and viral genome was detected on 5 (1.5% [95% confidence interval, 0.5%-3.5%]) of 336 probes. After cleaning with a towel impregnated with a disinfectant spray and disinfecting with UVC light, neither bacterial pathogenic flora nor viral genome was recovered from the probe.

Conclusions.

Endocavitary ultrasound probes may carry pathogens after removal of covers under routine conditions. A disinfection procedure consisting of cleaning with a disinfectant-impregnated towel followed by disinfection with UVC may provide a useful method for disinfecting endocavitary ultrasound probes.

Type
Original Article
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , February 2010 , pp. 165 - 170
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections associated with transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies—Georgia, 2005 (published correction appears in MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2006;55:1177). MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2006;55(28):776–777.Google Scholar
2.Rutala, WA, Weber, DJ; Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for disinfection and sterilization in healthcare facilities, 2008. MMWR Recomm Rep (in press).Google Scholar
3.Paz, A, Bauer, H, Potasman, I. Multiresistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa outbreak associated with contaminated transrectal ultrasound. J Hosp Infect 2001;49(2):148–149.Google Scholar
4.Gillespie, JL, Arnold, KE, Noble-Wang, J, et al.Outbreak of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Urology 2007;69(5):912–914.Google Scholar
5.Santé Canada. Guide de prévention des infections: lavage des mains, nettoyage, désinfection et stérilisation dans les établissements de santé. Vol 24, Suppl 8. Published December 1998. Available at: http://phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/ccdr-rmtc/98pdf/cdr24s8f.pdf. Accessed July 6, 2009.Google Scholar
6.American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. Guidelines for cleaning and preparing endocavitary ultrasound transducers between patients. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine; 2003.Google Scholar
7.Food and Drug Administration. FDA public notification: reprocessing of reusable ultrasound transducer assemblies used for biopsy procedures. Updated June 22,2006. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/PublicHealthNotifications/ucm062086.htm. Accessed July 6, 2009.Google Scholar
8.Rural infection control practice group (RICPRAC). Infection prevention and control manual. Published April 2005. Available at: http://health.vic.gov.au/_data/assets/pdf_file/0006/332547/inf-con-l.pdf. Accessed July 6, 2009.Google Scholar
9.National Health and Medical Research Council. Guidelines for the prevention of transmission of infectious diseases: infection control in the health care setting, 1999. Available at: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files _nhmrc/file/publications/synopses/withdrawn/ic6.pdf. Accessed July 6, 2009.Google Scholar
10.Australasian Society for Ultrasound in Medicine. Guidelines for disinfection of intracavitary transducers: policies and statement, 2005. Published September 2007. Available at: http://www.asum.com.au/site/files/P&S/B2_policy.pdf. Accessed July 6, 2009.Google Scholar
11.American College of Radiology. Practice guideline for the performance of ultrasound evaluation of the prostate, 2006. Available at: http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quaHty_safety/guidelines/us/us_prostate.aspx. Accessed July 6, 2009.Google Scholar
12.Department of Health, Government of West Australia. Prevention of cross infection in diagnostic ultrasound. Operational circular, December 23, 2004. Available at: http://www.health.wa.gov.au/circulars/pdfs/11878.pdf. Accessed July 6, 2009.Google Scholar
13.Jimenez, R, Duff, P. Sheathing of the endovaginal ultrasound probe: is it adequate? Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 1993;1(1):37–39.Google Scholar
14.Hignett, M, Claman, P. High rates of perforation are found in endovaginal ultrasound probe covers before and after ovocyte retrieval for in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 1995;12(9):606–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Rooks, VJ, Yancey, MK, Elg, SA, et al.Comparison of probe sheaths for endovaginal sonography. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87(1):27–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Storment, JM, Monga, M, Blanco, JD. Ineffectiveness of latex condoms in preventing contamination of the transvaginal ultrasound transducer head. South Med J 1997;90(2):206–208.Google Scholar
17.Milki, AA, Fisch, JD. Vaginal ultrasound probe cover leakage: implications for patient care. Fertil Steril 1998;69(3):409–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Amis, S, Ruddy, M, Kibbler, CC, et al.Assessment of condoms as probe covers for transvaginal sonography. J Clin Ultrasound 2000;28(6):295–298.Google Scholar
19.Masood, J, Voulgaris, S, Awogu, O, et al.Condom perforation during transrectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) prostate biopsies: a potential infection risk. Int Urol Nephrol 2007;39(4):1121–1124.Google Scholar
20.Garland, SM, de Crespigny, L. Prevention of infection in obstetric and gynecological ultrasound practice. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1996;7(1): 1–4.Google Scholar
21.Kac, G, Gueneret, M, Rodi, A, et al.Evaluation of a new disinfection procedure for ultrasound probes using ultraviolet light. J Hosp Infect 2007;65(2):163–168.Google Scholar
22.Weinstock, H, Berman, S, Cates, W Jr.Sexually transmitted diseases among American youth: incidence and prevalence estimates. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2004;36(1):6–10.Google Scholar
23.Markowitz, LE, Dunne, EF, Saraiya, M, et al.Quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine: recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2007;56(RR-2): 1–23.Google Scholar
24.Burchell, AN, Winer, RL, de Sanjosé, S, Franco, EL. Epidemiology and transmission dynamics of genital HPV infection. Vaccine 2006;24(suppl 3):52–61.Google Scholar
25.Burchell, AN, Richardson, H, Mahmud, SM, et al.Modeling the sexual transmissibility of human Papillomavirus infection using stochastic computer simulation and empirical data from a cohort study of young women in Montreal, Canada. Am J Epidemiol 2006;163(6):534–543.Google Scholar