Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 26, 2026

The Portable Chemical Sterilizer PCS, D-FENS, and D-FEND ALL: Novel Chlorine Dioxide Decontamination Technologies for the Military
Published on: June 29, 2014
Randomized Comparison of 3 High-Level Disinfection and Sterilization Procedures for Duodenoscopes
Graham M Snyder1, Sharon B Wright1, Anne Smithey2
1Division of Infection Control/Hospital Epidemiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Background And Aims:
Duodenoscopes have been implicated in the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO). We compared the frequency of duodenoscope contamination with MDRO or any other bacteria after disinfection or sterilization by 3 different methods.
Methods:
We performed a single-center prospective randomized study in which duodenoscopes were randomly reprocessed by standard high-level disinfection (sHLD), double high-level disinfection (dHLD), or standard high-level disinfection followed by ethylene oxide gas sterilization (HLD/ETO). Samples were collected from the elevator mechanism and working channel of each duodenoscope and cultured before use. The primary outcome was the proportion of duodenoscopes with an elevator mechanism or working channel culture showing 1 or more MDRO; secondary outcomes included the frequency of duodenoscope contamination with more than 0 and 10 or more colony-forming units (CFU) of aerobic bacterial growth on either sampling location.
Results:
After 3 months of enrollment, the study was closed because of the futility; we did not observe sufficient events to evaluate the primary outcome. Among 541 duodenoscope culture events, 516 were included in the final analysis. No duodenoscope culture in any group was positive for MDRO. Bacterial growth of more than 0 CFU was noted in 16.1% duodenoscopes in the sHLD group, 16.0% in the dHLD group, and 22.5% in the HLD/ETO group (P = .21). Bacterial growth or 10 or more CFU was noted in 2.3% of duodenoscopes in the sHLD group, 4.1% in the dHLD group, and 4.2% in the HLD/ETO group (P = .36). MRDOs were cultured from 3.2% of pre-procedure rectal swabs and 2.5% of duodenal aspirates.
Conclusions:
In a comparison of duodenoscopes reprocessed by sHLD, dHLD, or HLD/ETO, we found no significant differences between groups for MDRO or bacteria contamination. Enhanced disinfection methods (dHLD or HLD/ETO) did not provide additional protection against contamination. However, insufficient events occurred to assess our primary study end-point. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02611648.
Related Concept Videos
Cleaning, Sterilization, and Disinfection
Cleaning
The cleaning process usually involves using water with detergents or enzymatic cleaner and removing foreign material from objects and surfaces, including organic material such as body fluids or inorganic material like soil. Cleaning is performed before high-level disinfection and sterilization because foreign materials on the cover of the devices interfere with process...
Methods of Sterilization II: Chemical Methods
Using chemical sterilization rather than heat to clean out equipment is recommended. It eradicates and removes all bacteria,...
Methods of Sterilization I: Physical Methods
Steam sterilization uses non-toxic, low-cost moist heat in the form of saturated steam under pressure, which is fast, microbicidal, and sporicidal, and quickly warms and penetrates fabrics. Autoclaves, or steam sterilizers, expose each item to direct steam contact for a predetermined time at the necessary...
Hand hygiene
Hand washing...
Endoscopic Procedures I: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
During an EGD, the endoscope can be used to:

