ReviewJournal of infection prevention2023
Cross-contamination rate of reusable flexible bronchoscopes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of infection prevention, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incidence and factors associated with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales infection among hospitalized internal medicine patients in Korea: a retrospective observational study.Journal of Korean biological nursing science · 2026Article
- Identification of key control points in instrument reprocessing of hospital central sterile supply department and its association analysis with surgical site infection.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Bronchoscopy increased the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing lobectomy for lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a novel reprocessed bCPAP system on sepsis rates among preterm neonates with respiratory distress: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Comparison of utility and organizational impact of reusable and single-use rhinolaryngoscopes in a tertiary otorhinolaryngology department.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
- Steerable Intubation Guide in Combination with Video-Laryngoscope for Intubating Patients with Anterior Airway.Translational perioperative and pain medicine · 2023Article
- Differences in organizational impact, performance and quality related to the use of single- and/or reusable bronchoscopes in anesthesiology and resuscitation.Global & regional health technology assessmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bronchoscopy is generally a safe and efficient procedure. However, the risk of cross-contamination with reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFB) has been detected in several outbreaks worldwide. Aim: To estimate the average cross-contamination rate of patient-ready RFBs based on available published data. Methods: We performed a systematic literature review in PubMed and Embase to investigate the cross-contamination rate of RFB. Included studies identified indicator organisms or colony forming units (CFU) levels, and total number of samples >10. The Contamination threshold was defined according to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Nurse and Associates (ESGE-ESGENA) guidelines. To calculate the total contamination rate, a random effects model was applied. Heterogeneity was analysed via a Q-test and illustrated in a forest plot. Publication bias was analysed via the Egger's regression test and illustrated in a funnel plot. Results: Eight studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The random effects model included 2169 samples and 149 events (positive tests). The total RFB cross-contamination rate was 8.69% ± 1.86 (standard division [SD]) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.06-12.33%). The result showed significant heterogeneity of 90% and publication bias. Discussion: Significant heterogeneity and publication bias is likely associated with varying methodology and aversion towards publishing negative findings, respectively. Based on the cross-contamination rate an infection control paradigm shift is needed to ensure patient safety. We recommend to follow the Spaulding classification and classify RFBs as critical items. Accordingly, infection control measures such as obligatory surveillance, and implementing single-use alternatives must be considered where feasible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.