Clinical Endoscopy

Original Article

Microbiological surveillance result of endoscopes after INTERCEPT Foam Spray: a quasi-experimental pilot study in Singapore: Caihong Wang, Rong Zhang, Ruhui Fan, Jiewen Low, Ruochen Du, Xueyun Ma, Congcong Cai; Clin Endosc 2024;57(6):821-831. Published online November 4, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2024.030

Graphical Abstract Abstract PDF Supplementary Material PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: This study aimed to assess the impact of INTERCEPT Foam Spray (IFS) application on delayed endoscope reprocessing through microbiological surveillance culture (MSC).
Methods
A quasi-experimental, matched-comparison pilot study was conducted using gastrointestinal endoscopy. IFS was applied to the endoscopes after precleaning and before reprocessing the next day. An equal number of endoscopes, matched by endoscope type, were subjected to routine reprocessing. The MSC were subjected to high-level disinfection to detect any contamination. Data were analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher exact test (categorical data) and Student t-test (continuous data).
Results
In total, 150 MSCs were collected from 42 endoscopes. Positive MSCs were observed in 4.0% (4/75) of the sprayed group and 1.3% (1/75) of the control group (95% confidence interval, 30.34–0.31; p>0.05), all of which were contributed by colonoscopes. Colonoscope were more prone to positive MSC (mean difference in percentage, p<0.05). Mean spraying hours were not associated with detected growth (11.7% vs. 13.6%; 95% confidence interval, 1.43 to –5.27; p>0.05), with environmental and skin flora being the primary contaminants.
Conclusions
IFS may be applied when delayed endoscope processing is necessary, but with caution when applied to colonoscopes. However, further research is warranted to verify the result.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Efficacy of spray flushing in the reprocessing of flexible endoscopes
Harendra Kumar, Arkadeep Dhali, Rick Maity, Jyotirmoy Biswas
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Endoscope processing effectiveness: A reality check and call to action for infection preventionists and clinicians
Cori L. Ofstead, Abigail G. Smart, Lydia L. Hurst, Larry A. Lamb
American Journal of Infection Control.2025; 53(7): 785. CrossRef

1,557 View
117 Download
2 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Review

Endoscopic stenting for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: focusing on comparison of endoscopic stenting and surgical gastrojejunostomy: Sun Gyo Lim, Chan Gyoo Kim; Clin Endosc 2024;57(5):571-580. Published online February 23, 2024; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2023.160

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a condition characterized by blockage or narrowing where the stomach empties its contents into the small intestine due to primary malignant tumors or metastatic diseases. This condition leads to various symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and weight loss. To manage malignant GOO, different treatment options have been employed, including surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ), gastroduodenal stenting (GDS) using self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ). This review focuses on comparing the clinical outcomes of endoscopic stenting (GDS and EUS-GJ) with SGJ for malignant GOO. Studies have shown that GDS with SEMS provides comparable clinical outcomes and safety for the palliation of obstructive symptoms. The choice between covered and uncovered SEMS remains controversial, as different studies have reported varying results. EUS-GJ, performed via endoscopic ultrasound guidance, has shown promising efficacy and safety in managing malignant GOO, but further studies are needed to establish it as the primary treatment option. Comparative analyses suggest that GDS has higher recurrence and reintervention rates compared to EUS-GJ and SGJ, with similar overall procedural complications. However, bleeding rates were lower with GDS than with SGJ. Randomized controlled trials are required to determine the optimal treatment approach for malignant GOO.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Palliative management for malignant biliary obstruction and gastric outlet obstruction from pancreatic cancer
Pengfei Wu, Kai Chen, Jin He
Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery.2025; 9(2): 218. CrossRef
Aortoenteric Fistula Formation From Chronic Erosion of an Axios Gastroduodenal Stent in a Patient With a History of Radiation
Caleb M Glover, Adam Bowen, Claire Russell, Ali Rida, Alexandra Davies, Edward Cay, John Walling
Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef

5,489 View
427 Download
1 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Original Articles

Efficacy of a novel channel-cleaning ball brush for endoscope reprocessing: a randomized controlled trial: Kwang Hyun Chung, Jeong Don Chae, Wonho Choe, Hyo Young Lee, Il Hwan Oh, Byoung Kwan Son; Clin Endosc 2022;55(5):674-682. Published online August 2, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2021.210

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: Endoscopic channels are difficult to clean and can cause infection transmission. We examined the effectiveness of a newly developed channel-cleaning ball brush (BB), which is sucked into the endoscopic channel and scrapes and cleans the lumen as it passes through.
Methods
The upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopes used for patient examinations were randomly selected as the conventional brush (CB) or BB group. After manual cleaning, the presence or absence of carbohydrates, proteins, adenosine triphosphate, and hemoglobin was assessed.
Results
Fifty-six and 58 endoscopes were cleaned with the CB and BB, respectively. Carbohydrate and protein were detected in one (1.8%) and two endoscopes (3.4%) in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=1.000). Hemoglobin was observed in one (1.8%) and three endoscopes (5.2%) in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=0.636). The adenosine triphosphate levels were 10.6±15.9 and 12.5±14.3 relative light units in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=0.496). Twenty-seven (48.2%) and 19 (32.8%) endoscopes were positive for microbial cultures in the CB and BB groups, respectively (p=0.136).
Conclusions
The efficacy of BB was not significantly different from that of CB in the endoscopic channel-cleaning process.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

An investigation into cleaning quality of suction-type metal lumen instruments: a cross-sectional study
Yuqi Wu, Li Li
Scientific Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
A prospective, quasi-experimental study on the efficacy of a novel double-headed endoscope cleaning brush for cleaning flexible endoscopes
Rui Shen, Yaping Wu, Jiajun Lv, Qukai Liu, Weiyan Yao, Shu Chen, Dandan Liu, Huijun Xi, Yibo Zhang
BMC Gastroenterology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of brushing efficacy for gastroscopes using different brush types under simulated contamination conditions
J.Y. Li, W.Q. Hu, C.Y. Zhou, Y.X. Ge, Q. Gu
Journal of Hospital Infection.2025; 162: 160. CrossRef
Simulated-use evaluation of rapid ChannelCheck™ cleaning test for optimal detection of organic residues in flexible endoscope channels
K. Kulkarni, M. Gavette, M.J. Alfa
Journal of Hospital Infection.2024; 152: 66. CrossRef

4,615 View
199 Download
3 Web of Science
4 Crossref

Confirming Whether Fine Needle Biopsy Device Shortens the Learning Curve of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Without Rapid Onsite Evaluation: Meng-Ying Lin, Cheng-Lin Wu, Mitsuhiro Kida, Wei-Lun Chang, Bor-Shyang Sheu; Clin Endosc 2021;54(3):420-427. Published online May 28, 2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2020.184

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition requires a long learning curve. We aimed to compare the skill maturation curves between fine needle aspiration (FNA) and biopsy (FNB) for tissue acquisition.
Methods
The initial 60 procedures performed by the trainee endosonographer (30 FNA vs. 30 FNB) were consecutively enrolled. The difference in procedure performance was compared between the two groups. Learning curves were assessed. Twenty additional cases were subsequently enrolled to assess the consistency of performance in the FNB group.
Results
The FNB group acquired larger tissue samples (2.35 vs. 0.70 mm2; p<0.001) with lower blood content (p=0.001) and higher tissue quality (p=0.017) compared with the FNA group. In addition, the FNB group required less needle pass to establish a diagnosis (2.43 vs. 2.97; p=0.006). A threshold diagnostic sensitivity of ≥80% was achieved after performing 10 FNB procedures. The number of needle passes significantly decreased after conducting 20 FNB procedures (1.80 vs. 2.70; p=0.041). The diagnostic sensitivity and number of needle passes remained the same in the subsequent FNB procedures. By contrast, this skill maturation phenomenon was not observed after performing 30 FNA procedures.
Conclusions
In EUS-guided tissue acquisition, the FNB needle was more efficient and thus shortened the learning curve of EUSguided tissue acquisition in trainee endosonographers.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Identification of Endosonographic Features that Compromise EUS-FNB Diagnostic Accuracy in Pancreatic Masses
Hsueh-Chien Chiang, Chien-Jui Huang, Yao-Shen Wang, Chun-Te Lee, Meng-Ying Lin, Wei-Lun Chang
Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2024; 69(11): 4302. CrossRef
Tissue Quality Comparison Between Heparinized Wet Suction and Dry Suction in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine Needle Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Masses: A Randomized Crossover Study
Meng-Ying Lin, Cheng-Lin Wu, Yung-Yeh Su, Chien-Jui Huang, Wei-Lun Chang, Bor-Shyang Sheu
Gut and Liver.2023; 17(2): 318. CrossRef
Factors Affecting the Learning Curve in the Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Sampling of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Prospective Study
Marcel Razpotnik, Simona Bota, Mathilde Kutilek, Gerolf Essler, Christian Urak, Julian Prosenz, Jutta Weber-Eibel, Andreas Maieron, Markus Peck-Radosavljevic
Gut and Liver.2023; 17(2): 308. CrossRef
Investigation into the content of red material in EUS-guided pancreatic cancer biopsies
Meng-Ying Lin, Yung-Yeh Su, Yu-Ting Yu, Chien-Jui Huang, Bor-Shyang Sheu, Wei-Lun Chang
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.2023; 97(6): 1083. CrossRef

4,334 View
85 Download
4 Web of Science
4 Crossref

An Ultrathin Endoscope with a 2.4-mm Working Channel Shortens the Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Time by Shortening the Suction Time: Satoshi Shinozaki, Yoshimasa Miura, Yuji Ino, Kenjiro Shinozaki, Alan Kawarai Lefor, Hironori Yamamoto; Clin Endosc 2015;48(6):516-521. Published online November 30, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2015.48.6.516; Correction in: Clin Endosc 2016;49(1):100

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Background
/Aims: Poor suction ability through a narrow working channel prolongs esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The aim of this study was to evaluate suction with a new ultrathin endoscope (EG-580NW2; Fujifilm Corp.) having a 2.4-mm working channel in clinical practice.
Methods
To evaluate in vitro suction, 200 mL water was suctioned and the suction time was measured. The clinical data of 117 patients who underwent EGD were retrospectively reviewed on the basis of recorded video, and the suction time was measured by using a stopwatch.
Results
In vitro, the suction time with the EG-580NW2 endoscope was significantly shorter than that with the use of an ultrathin endoscope with a 2.0-mm working channel (EG-580NW; mean ± standard deviation, 22.7±1.1 seconds vs. 34.7±2.2 seconds; p<0.001). We analyzed the total time and the suction time for routine EGD in 117 patients (50 in the EG-580NW2 group and 67 in the EG-580NW group). In the EG-580NW2 group, the total time for EGD was significantly shorter than that in the EG-580NW group (275.3±42.0 seconds vs. 300.6±46.5 seconds, p=0.003). In the EG-580NW2 group, the suction time was significantly shorter than that in the EG-580NW group (19.2±7.6 seconds vs. 38.0±15.9 seconds, p<0.001).
Conclusions
An ultrathin endoscope with a 2.4-mm working channel considerably shortens the routine EGD time by shortening the suction time, in comparison with an endoscope with a 2.0-mm working channel.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Optical spectroscopy for in vivo medical diagnosis—a review of the state of the art and future perspectives
Jang Ah Kim, Dominic J Wales, Guang-Zhong Yang
Progress in Biomedical Engineering.2020; 2(4): 042001. CrossRef
Necessity of transnasal gastroscopy in routine diagnostics: a patient-centred requirement analysis
Anna-Livia Schuldt, Holger Kirsten, Jan Tuennemann, Mario Heindl, Florian van Bommel, Juergen Feisthammel, Marcus Hollenbach, Albrecht Hoffmeister
BMJ Open Gastroenterology.2019; 6(1): e000264. CrossRef

8,364 View
59 Download
3 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Focused Review Series: Endoscopic Disinfection in the Eras of MERS

Recent Update on Microbiological Monitoring of Gastrointestinal Endoscopes after High-Level Disinfection: Suk Pyo Shin, Won Hee Kim; Clin Endosc 2015;48(5):369-373. Published online September 30, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2015.48.5.369

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Endoscopy-related infections are important contributors to nosocomial infections. Endoscope reprocessing according to standard guidelines ensures high-level disinfection and prevents endoscopy-related infections. Microbiological surveillance may help in monitoring the effectiveness of gastrointestinal endoscope disinfection. The process involves microbial cultures and non-culture methods such as bioburden assays, adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence, and quantitative polymerase chain reactions (PCRs). Surveillance culturing to monitor endoscopes after reprocessing has been recommended by a majority of organizations. Bioburden assays, ATP bioluminescence, and quantitative PCRs provide rapid and reliable measures. Each institution will have to try to establish its own surveillance guidelines.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

A comparative assessment of contamination rates in gastrointestinal endoscope reprocessing: sterilization versus high‐level disinfection
Tanyaporn Chantarojanasiri, Rachanikorn Rungrueangmaitree, Siriporn Thongsri, Urasa Jampa‐ngern, Thawee Ratanachu‐Ek
DEN Open.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Monthly endoscopy surveillance culture facilitates detection of breaches in the scope reprocessing procedure: 5‐year experience in an endoscopy center
Shu‐Hui Chen, Theophile Liu, Huei‐Wen Lai, Hui‐Lan Chang, Hsu‐Heng Yen
Advances in Digestive Medicine.2022; 9(2): 103. CrossRef
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-Associated Infections: Update on an Emerging Issue
Anasua Deb, Abhilash Perisetti, Hemant Goyal, Mark M. Aloysius, Sonali Sachdeva, Dushyant Dahiya, Neil Sharma, Nirav Thosani
Digestive Diseases and Sciences.2022; 67(5): 1718. CrossRef
Microbiological Surveillance of Endoscopes in a Southern Italian Transplantation Hospital: A Retrospective Study from 2016 to 2019
Valentina Marchese, Daniele Di Carlo, Gaetano Fazio, Santi Mauro Gioè, Angelo Luca, Rossella Alduino, Monica Rizzo, Fabio Tuzzolino, Francesco Monaco, Pier Giulio Conaldi, Bruno Douradinha, Giuseppina Di Martino
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2021; 18(6): 3057. CrossRef
The application of plan, do, check, act (PDCA) quality management in reducing nosocomial infections in endoscopy rooms: It does work
Xiaoming Kong, Xiaolu Zhu, Yidan Zhang, Jie Wu
International Journal of Clinical Practice.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Does the Reprocessing of Endoscopes Have to Take Place Immediately after Pre-Cleaning? A First Evaluation
Vanessa M Eichel, Jonas M Jabs, Samy Unser, Nico T Mutters, Martin Scherrer
Clinical Endoscopy.2021; 54(4): 526. CrossRef
Turbulent fluid flow is a novel closed-system sample extraction method for flexible endoscope channels of various inner diameters
Seo Yean Sohn, Michelle J. Alfa, Richard Lai, Yacoob Tabani, Mohamed E. Labib
Journal of Microbiological Methods.2020; 168: 105782. CrossRef
Duodenoscope as a Vector for Transmission
Jennifer T. Higa, Andrew S. Ross
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America.2020; 30(4): 653. CrossRef
A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Duodenoscope Reprocessing Surveillance Methods
Travis J. De Wolfe, Nasia Safdar, Megan Meller, John Marx, Patrick R. Pfau, Eric M. Nelsen, Mark E. Benson, Anurag Soni, Mark Reichelderfer, Megan Duster, Deepak V. Gopal
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2019; 2019: 1. CrossRef
Comparative Study of Microbiological Monitoring Results from Three Types of Sampling Methods after Gastrointestinal Endoscope Reprocessing
Su Ma, Lili Feng, Ziyi Jiang, Xian Gao, Xisha Long, Shaonan Zhuang, Wenxia Ding, Taiyao Chen, Zhaoshen Li, Lingjuan Zhang, Huijun Xi, Hongzhi Zhang
BioMed Research International.2019; 2019: 1. CrossRef
Métodos microbiológicos para la monitorización de la limpieza, desinfección y esterilización de dispositivos médicos
Rosa María Blázquez-Garrido, Eva Cuchí-Burgos, Carmen Martín-Salas, Patricia Ruiz-Garbajosa
Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica.2018; 36(10): 657. CrossRef
The validity of adenosine triphosphate measurement in detecting endoscope contamination
C.E. McCafferty, D. Abi-Hanna, M.J. Aghajani, G.T. Micali, I. Lockart, K. Vickery, I.B. Gosbell, S.O. Jensen
Journal of Hospital Infection.2018; 100(3): e142. CrossRef
Microbiological monitoring of medical devices after cleaning, disinfection and sterilisation
Rosa María Blázquez-Garrido, Eva Cuchí-Burgos, Carmen Martín-Salas, Patricia Ruiz-Garbajosa
Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.).2018; 36(10): 657. CrossRef
Association Between Storage Interval and Contamination of Reprocessed Flexible Endoscopes in a Pediatric Gastrointestinal Procedural Unit
Patricia Scanlon, Kathleen Flaherty, Erik A. Reilly, Ellen G. Barth, Gail Potter-Bynoe, Jeff Cardini, Ann Marie Riley, Alexander J. McAdam, Thomas J. Sandora
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.2017; 38(2): 131. CrossRef
Surveillance of Endoscopes: Comparison of Different Sampling Techniques
Lien Cattoir, Thomas Vanzieleghem, Lisa Florin, Tania Helleputte, Martine De Vos, Bruno Verhasselt, Jerina Boelens, Isabel Leroux-Roels
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.2017; 38(9): 1062. CrossRef
Education and Training Guidelines for the Board of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Hee Seok Moon, Eun Kwang Choi, Ji Hyun Seo, Jeong Seop Moon, Ho June Song, Kyoung Oh Kim, Jong Jin Hyun, Sung Kwan Shin, Beom Jae Lee, Sang Heon Lee
Clinical Endoscopy.2017; 50(4): 345. CrossRef
Sterile Reverse Osmosis Water Combined with Friction Are Optimal for Channel and Lever Cavity Sample Collection of Flexible Duodenoscopes
Michelle J. Alfa, Harminder Singh, Zoann Nugent, Donald Duerksen, Gale Schultz, Carol Reidy, Patricia DeGagne, Nancy Olson
Frontiers in Medicine.2017;[Epub] CrossRef
The Assessment and Improvement of the Steps in the Endoscope-Reprocessing: A Hospital Report
Habip Gedik
Journal of Bacteriology & Mycology: Open Access.2017;[Epub] CrossRef
Duodenoscope-Associated Bacterial Infections: A Review and Update
Jennifer T. Higa, Michael Gluck, Andrew S. Ross
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology.2016; 14(2): 185. CrossRef

12,021 View
249 Download
18 Web of Science
19 Crossref

Role of Clinical Endoscopy in Emphasizing Endoscope Disinfection: Ji Kon Ryu, Eun Young Kim, Kwang An Kwon, Il Ju Choi, Ki Baik Hahm; Clin Endosc 2015;48(5):351-355. Published online September 30, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2015.48.5.351

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Based on the unexpected Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) outbreak in Korea, it was established that the virus can spread easily, MERS exposure in hospitals carries an extreme risk for infection as well as mortality, and the sharing of information was essential for infection control. Although the incidence of exogenous infections related to contaminated endoscopes is very low, the majority of published outbreaks have been caused by various shortcomings in reprocessing procedures, including insufficient training or awareness. Ever since the inauguration of "Clinical Endoscopy" as an English-language journal of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in 2011, it has published several articles on disinfection of the endoscope and its accessories. Many Science Citation Index journals have also emphasized high-level disinfection of the gastrointestinal endoscope. Many papers have been produced specifically, since the outbreak of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae in 2013. The recent review papers concluded that quality control is the most important issue among all the aspects of procedural care, including the efficiency of the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit and reprocessing room. Thorough reprocessing of endoscopes using high-level disinfection and sterilization methods may be essential for reducing the risk of infection.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Audit of flexible laryngoscopy use and decontamination using a chlorine dioxide wipe system during COVID-19: Assessing the risk of disease transmission
Edgardo Abelardo, Gareth Davies, Charlotte Sanders, Jennifer Wallace, Nikolaos Makrygiannis, Antony Howarth
Infection Prevention in Practice.2022; 4(3): 100220. CrossRef
Laryngoscopy During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bo Hae Kim, Yun-Sung Lim
Journal of The Korean Society of Laryngology, Phoniatrics and Logopedics.2022; 33(3): 160. CrossRef
Endoscopy mitigation strategy with telemedicine and low-cost device use for COVID-19 prevention: A fourth-level Colombian center experience
José Roberto Jurado, Jorge Hernán Santos Nieto, Jairo Ospina Gaitán, Constanza Garzón Bonilla, Ricardo Villarreal, David Acevedo, Laura Cabrera, Luis Felipe Cabrera, Mauricio Pedraza
Arab Journal of Gastroenterology.2021; 22(2): 170. CrossRef
The structure and delivery of a novel training course on endoscope reprocessing and standard precautions in the endoscopy unit
Carmel Malvar, Tiffany Nguyen-Vu, Amandeep Shergill, Yung Ka Chin, Aruna Baniya, Michelle McAnanama, Tonya Kaltenbach, Roy Soetikno
VideoGIE.2020; 5(5): 176. CrossRef
Flexible Laryngoscopy and COVID‐19
Anaïs Rameau, VyVy N. Young, Milan R. Amin, Lucian Sulica
Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery.2020; 162(6): 813. CrossRef
COVID-19 outbreak and endoscopy: Considerations in patients encountered in a foregut surgery practice
Tanya Olszewski, Andrew D Grubic, Shahin Ayazi, Blair A Jobe
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2020; 12(5): 197. CrossRef
Comparative Study of Microbiological Monitoring Results from Three Types of Sampling Methods after Gastrointestinal Endoscope Reprocessing
Su Ma, Lili Feng, Ziyi Jiang, Xian Gao, Xisha Long, Shaonan Zhuang, Wenxia Ding, Taiyao Chen, Zhaoshen Li, Lingjuan Zhang, Huijun Xi, Hongzhi Zhang
BioMed Research International.2019; 2019: 1. CrossRef

7,924 View
109 Download
6 Web of Science
7 Crossref

Original Article

Feasibility of Obtaining Quantitative 3-Dimensional Information Using Conventional Endoscope: A Pilot Study: Jong Jin Hyun, Hoon Jai Chun, Bora Keum, Yeon Seok Seo, Yong Sik Kim, Yoon Tae Jeen, Hong Sik Lee, Soon Ho Um, Chang Duck Kim, Ho Sang Ryu, Jong-Wook Lim, Dong-Gi Woo, Young-Joong Kim, Myo-Taeg Lim; Clin Endosc 2012;45(3):182-188. Published online August 22, 2012; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2012.45.3.182

Abstract PDF PubReader ePub

Background/Aims

Three-dimensional (3D) imaging is gaining popularity and has been partly adopted in laparoscopic surgery or robotic surgery but has not been applied to gastrointestinal endoscopy. As a first step, we conducted an experiment to evaluate whether images obtained by conventional gastrointestinal endoscopy could be used to acquire quantitative 3D information.

Methods

Two endoscopes (GIF-H260) were used in a Borrmann type I tumor model made of clay. The endoscopes were calibrated by correcting the barrel distortion and perspective distortion. Obtained images were converted to gray-level image, and the characteristics of the images were obtained by edge detection. Finally, data on 3D parameters were measured by using epipolar geometry, two view geometry, and pinhole camera model.

Results

The focal length (f) of endoscope at 30 mm was 258.49 pixels. Two endoscopes were fixed at predetermined distance, 12 mm (d₁₂). After matching and calculating disparity (v2-v1), which was 106 pixels, the calculated length between the camera and object (L) was 29.26 mm. The height of the object projected onto the image (h) was then applied to the pinhole camera model, and the result of H (height and width) was 38.21 mm and 41.72 mm, respectively. Measurements were conducted from 2 different locations. The measurement errors ranged from 2.98% to 7.00% with the current Borrmann type I tumor model.

Conclusions

It was feasible to obtain parameters necessary for 3D analysis and to apply the data to epipolar geometry with conventional gastrointestinal endoscope to calculate the size of an object.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Three-dimensional light-field microendoscopy with a GRIN lens array
Tara M. Urner, Andrew Inman, Benjamin Lapid, Shu Jia
Biomedical Optics Express.2022; 13(2): 590. CrossRef
3D light-field endoscopic imaging using a GRIN lens array
Changliang Guo, Tara Urner, Shu Jia
Applied Physics Letters.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Current and emerging robotic assisted intervention for Notes
Siyang Zuo, Shuxin Wang
Expert Review of Medical Devices.2016; 13(12): 1095. CrossRef
Application of robotics in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A review
Baldwin Po Man Yeung
World Journal of Gastroenterology.2016; 22(5): 1811. CrossRef
Quantitative analysis of velopharyngeal movement using a stereoendoscope: accuracy and reliability of range images
Asuka Nakano, Katsuaki Mishima, Ruriko Shiraishi, Yoshiya Ueyama
Computer Aided Surgery.2015; 20(1): 29. CrossRef
The Evolution of the Conventional Endoscope in an Era of 3-Dimensional Technology
Geun Am Song
Clinical Endoscopy.2012; 45(3): 181. CrossRef

6,852 View
72 Download
6 Crossref

Glutaraldehyde 와 자동 세척기를 이용한 내시경 소독방법의 임상에서의 유용성 ( Disinfection Efficacy of Glutaraldehyde and an Automated Endoscope Reprocessor : an In - Use Evaluation ): Korean J Gastrointest Endosc 2001;22(6):393-398. Published online November 30, 2000

Abstract PDF: Background
/Aims: Safety of endoscopic procedures has been a major issue over the last 10 years. Most endoscopy units use 2% glutaraldehyde and automated endoscope reprocessors (AERs) for disinfecting gastrointestinal endoscopes. We attempted an in-use evaluation of the current reprocessing procedures. Methods: Thirty flexible endoscopes were randomly collected just after upper endoscopic examinations and were disinfected using 2% glutaraldehyde in an AER. Cultures were taken from biopsy channels (S-l), tip of the insertion tubes (S-2), umbilical cords (S-3), and angulation knobs (S-4). Results: In 63,3% (19/30) of endoscopes, there was no microbial contamination after disinfection procedures. The culture positive rates of S-l, S-2, S-3, and S-4 samples were 20,0%, 0.0%, 3.3%, and 20.0%, respectively. Microorganisms of 13 species were identified, but there was no pathogen related with reported infectious complications after endoscopic procedures. Conclusions: Current disinfection procedure using 2% glutaraldehyde and an AER appears to be very effective in decontaminating patient-used endoscopes. Low level microbial contamination of endoscopes after conventional reprocessing methods may not impose great risk on patients. (Korean J Gastrointest Endosc 2001;22:393-398)

1,825 View
13 Download

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search