Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
201,818 studies31 sourcesUpdated 10 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYGMS hygiene and infection control

Reusable and single-use endoscopes: infection prevention and sustainability considerations - a narrative review.

  • Christoph Lübbert1,2
  • Nico T Mutters3
  • Simone Scheithauer4
  • Heike von Baum5
  • Alexander Meining6
  • Andreas Rieß7
  • Marc Thanheiser8
  • Franziska Lexow8
  • Jana Maidhof8
  • Axel Kramer9
9 affiliations
  1. 1Division of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Department of Medicine I, Leipzig University Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
  2. 2Department of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Hospital St. Georg gGmbH, Leipzig, Germany.
  3. 3Institute for Hygiene and Public Health, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
  4. 4Department of Infection Control and Infectious Diseases, University Medical Center Göttingen (UMG), Georg-August University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
  5. 5Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, University Hospital of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
  6. 6Interventional and Experimental Endoscopy (InExEn), Department of Internal Medicine 2, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
  7. 7Josefs-Gesellschaft gAG, Cologne, Germany.
  8. 8Department for Infectious Diseases, Unit 14: Hospital Hygiene, Infection Prevention and Control, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
  9. 9Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Despite the greater effort required for reprocessing, reusable endoscopes may be environmentally more beneficial than disposable products, particularly when used frequently and with optimized reprocessing procedures. Single-use endoscopes generate more waste and require more resources per usage but may offer advantages in certain situations with regard to infection prevention and logistical simplicity. It is crucial to carefully weigh environmental considerations, patient safety, practical feasibility, and economic factors. For both systems, sustainability considerations must be taken into account in addition to their targeted, indication-specific use. Facility-specific decisions regarding the use of reusable versus single-use endoscopes require knowledge of the patients being treated, the scope of care, care structures, and procedure-specific risks.

Related

  1. Chlorhexidine plus alcohol versus povidone iodine plus alcohol, combined or not with innovative devices, for prevention of short-term peripheral venous catheter infection and failure (CLEAN 3 study): an investigator-initiated, open-label, single centre, randomised-controlled, two-by-two factorial trial
    Jérémy Guenezan, Nicolas Marjanovic, Bertrand Drugeon +11
    The Lancet Infectious DiseasesPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull text64 citedGeneral biologyInfectious diseaseHAL
  2. Recurrent pulmonary infection, a vicious cycle of multifactorial interactions, and prevention/treatment strategies
    Chaojie Shen, Yuhuan Li, Zongjun Xiang +3
    Frontiers in ImmunologyPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0ImmunologyCrossref
  3. Application of bacteriophages in the prevention of Bacillus cereus infection in potatoes
    Xia Ji, Ting Zhang, Xiaoyu Hu +6
    PeerJPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textEcologyCrossref
  4. Prophylactic treatment with broadly neutralizing antibody VRC01 selects for escape mutants after infection in Antibody-Mediated Prevention trials
    Carolyn Williamson, Lyle Curry, Nonhlanhla N. Mkhize +46
    Nature MicrobiologyPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textMicrobiologyPMC
  5. Health service staff and patients’ perceptions of the safety, quality, cost-effectiveness, environmental impact, benefits and challenges of disposable versus reusable endoscopes in upper gastrointestinal procedures: a qualitative study
    Julia Gauly, Amy Grove, Lazaros Andronis
    BMJ Open GastroenterologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textMicrobiologyPMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{lubbert2026reusable,
  title = {{Reusable and single-use endoscopes: infection prevention and sustainability considerations - a narrative review.}},
  author = {Christoph Lübbert and Nico T Mutters and Simone Scheithauer and Heike von Baum and Alexander Meining and Andreas Rieß and Marc Thanheiser and Franziska Lexow and Jana Maidhof and Axel Kramer},
  journal = {GMS hygiene and infection control},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.3205/dgkh000674},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42923108},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Reusable and single-use endoscopes: infection prevention and sustainability considerations - a narrative review.
AU  - Christoph Lübbert
AU  - Nico T Mutters
AU  - Simone Scheithauer
AU  - Heike von Baum
AU  - Alexander Meining
AU  - Andreas Rieß
AU  - Marc Thanheiser
AU  - Franziska Lexow
AU  - Jana Maidhof
AU  - Axel Kramer
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/10
JO  - GMS hygiene and infection control
DO  - 10.3205/dgkh000674
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42923108
AB  - Despite the greater effort required for reprocessing, reusable endoscopes may be environmentally more beneficial than disposable products, particularly when used frequently and with optimized reprocessing procedures. Single-use endoscopes generate more waste and require more resources per usage but may offer advantages in certain situations with regard to infection prevention and logistical simplicity. It is crucial to carefully weigh environmental considerations, patient safety, practical feasibility, and economic factors. For both systems, sustainability considerations must be taken into account in addition to their targeted, indication-specific use. Facility-specific decisions regarding the use of reusable versus single-use endoscopes require knowledge of the patients being treated, the scope of care, care structures, and procedure-specific risks.
SN  - 2196-5226
ER  -