Published in

Karger Publishers, Respiration, 4(92), p. 274-278, 2016

DOI: 10.1159/000449137

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

A Pseudo-Outbreak of <b>Pseudomonas putida</b> and <b>Stenotrophomonas maltophilia</b> in a Bronchoscopy Unit

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Endoscopes represent the medical devices most commonly linked to health care-associated outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks. Most of the recent outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks have resulted from contaminated automated endoscope reprocessors (AER) or the use of damaged or malfunctioning bronchoscopes or contaminated equipment. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> We investigated a pseudo-outbreak of <i>Pseudomonas putida</i> and <i>Stenotrophomonas maltophilia</i> recovered from bronchial washing (BW) specimens obtained during bronchoscopy in a bronchoscopy unit. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Samples were obtained from environmental surfaces in the endoscopy suite, bronchoscopes, and bronchoscopic dispensable material, and specimens of cleaning solutions, cleaning brushes, the AER, and the ultrasound system were sent for bacterial culture. Medical records were reviewed to identify possible infections after a bronchoscopy. <b><i>Results:</i></b><i>P. putida</i> and <i>S. maltophilia</i> were isolated from BW samples of 39 patients. The bronchoscopy models Olympus BF-1T160 and BF-160 were contaminated. Both bronchoscopes and other contaminated material (cleaning brushes, diluted cleaning solutions, and the sink) were isolated, but new cases continued to appear. The AER was recently installed, and new connections were used for the water lines and new tubes were connected to the AER. Initially, specimens were obtained from the external circuits and the internal walls of the AER. Finally, cultures were made from the filters on the water lines, and growth of <i>P. putida</i> and <i>S. maltophilia</i> was found. The investigation revealed that the BW specimens were contaminated because sterile saline was injected by means of the biopsy port of the bronchoscope and was recovered through the same channel by means of the proximal suction port. No patients developed clinical signs or symptoms of infection, but the positive cultures did lead to treatment of 21 patients. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> We described a pseudo-outbreak related to a contaminated bronchoscope because of inadequate installation of the AER for used new water lines and because the new tubes were connected to the AER. The antibacterial filters of the AER used tap water, and this may have contained low levels of microorganisms. No serious clinical complications derived from this pseudo-outbreak.