Dataset Information

Comparison of quantification methods for an endoscope lumen biofilm model.

ABSTRACT: Biofilm has been implicated in multi-drug resistant organism outbreaks following endoscopic procedures. Automated Endoscope Reprocessors (AER) are devices validated to clean and disinfect endoscopes per applicable standards. The ISO 15883 part 4 standard guides performance testing validation of AERs, including cleaning performance using a biofilm test soil. The standard recommends assessment of biofilm reduction using protein or carbohydrate quantification methods. The aim of this study was to assess the suitability of various quantification methods using the ISO biofilm model. The ISO 15883 part 5 biofilm test soil method was used to grow biofilm within lumens representative of endoscopes channels. The biofilm was then quantified using five methods: Crystal Violet (CV), Colony Forming Units (CFU), Total Organic Carbon (TOC), protein assay with Orthophtalaldehyde (OPA), and protein assay by micro bicinchoninic acid (μBCA). The five methods were statistically analyzed for their ability to assess biofilm reduction on samples accurately and precisely. In addition, the quantification methods were compared to demonstrate statistical equivalency, and thus their suitability for assessing biofilm cleaning performance testing of AERs.

SUBMITTER: Haas B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10630603 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of quantification methods for an endoscope lumen biofilm model.

Haas Bruno B James Sarah S Parker Albert E AE Gagnon Marie-Claude MC Goulet Noémie N Labrie Philippe P

Biofilm 20231020

Biofilm has been implicated in multi-drug resistant organism outbreaks following endoscopic procedures. Automated Endoscope Reprocessors (AER) are devices validated to clean and disinfect endoscopes per applicable standards. The ISO 15883 part 4 standard guides performance testing validation of AERs, including cleaning performance using a biofilm test soil. The standard recommends assessment of biofilm reduction using protein or carbohydrate quantification methods. The aim of this study was to a ...[more]

PMID: 37941805

Similar Datasets

Project description:The demand for rapid methods for the quantification of pathogens is increasing. Among these methods, those based on nucleic acids amplification (quantitative PCRs) are the most widespread worldwide. Together with the qPCR, a new approach named digital PCR (dPCR), has rapidly gained importance. The aim of our study was to compare the results obtained using two different dPCR systems and one qPCR in the quantification of three different bacterial pathogens: Listeria monocytogenes, Francisella tularensis, and Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis. For this purpose, three pre-existing qPCRs were used, while the same primers and probes, as well as PCR conditions, were transferred to two different dPCR systems: the QX200 (Bio-Rad) and the Quant Studio 3D (Applied Biosystems). The limits of detection and limits of quantification for all pathogens, and all PCR approaches applied, were determined using genomic pure DNAs. The quantification of unknown decimal suspensions of the three bacteria obtained by the three different PCR approaches was compared through the Linear Regression and Bland and Altman analyses. Our results suggest that, both dPCRs are able to quantify the same amount of bacteria, while the comparison among dPCRs and qPCRs, showed both over and under-estimation of the bacteria present in the unknown suspensions. Our results showed qPCR over-estimated the amount of M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis and F. tularensis cells. On the contrary, qPCR, compared to QX200 dPCR, under-estimated the amount of L. monocytogenes cells. However, the maximum difference among PCRs approaches was <0.5 Log10, while cultural methods underestimated the number of bacteria by one to two Log10 for Francisella tularensis and Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis. On the other hand, cultural and PCRs methods quantified the same amount of bacteria for L. monocytogenes, suggesting for this last pathogen, PCRs approaches can be considered as a valid alternative to the cultural ones.

Dataset Information

Comparison of quantification methods for an endoscope lumen biofilm model.

Publications

Comparison of quantification methods for an endoscope lumen biofilm model.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets