Modern medicine makes large use of minimally invasive technology based on single use devices (SUDs), but the increasing number of interventions and the consequent economic load on health system, drove many countries to adopt a reprocessing policy.
From literature analysis there are conflicting results regarding the safety and effectiveness of SUDs reuse. Nowadays, one of the few areas where such a reuse seems suitable both for safeness and cost effectiveness is interventional cardiology.
Considering that SUDs reprocessing represents the introduction of a new health technology, a multidisciplinary approach based on the Heath Technology Assessment (HTA) method is required, where stringent criteria of effectiveness, safety and suitability must be satisfied.
Important HTA reports on SUDs re-use, recently delivered by international public agencies, pointed out a substantive gap in knowledge regarding safety and effectiveness of this policy. At the present time there are no sufficient studies on re-use feasibility, nor studies on validation of devices reprocessing. This work aimed to bridge this gap by producing original experimental evidences.
For a safe and efficient device reuse, regeneration protocol should be designed to completely recover all hygienic and functional requirements provided by new devices. Available literature underlines the need to determine the correct cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization techniques and the relevant quality control. To define the organizational procedures and to place responsibilities in the use of reprocessed materials clear guidelines should be drafted.
The study aimed to define the fundamental steps for the assessment of a reprocessing procedure on interventional cardiac catheters.
Following HTA methodologies, the priority-setting definition underlined the need for technical, ethical, legal, and economic investigations. The experimental techniques applied in this work supply parameters for an adequate assessment of quality and safety of new and reprocessed devices. Device technical data and legal, bioethical, and economic issues are than integrated just in order to define the applicability and suitability of the SUDs reprocessing in interventional cardiology. Experimental data by conducing laboratory analyses on more than 650 devices including EP and PTCA catheters of the major worldwide manufacturers were produced. More than 2000 technical and biological tests were conducted on devices reprocessed up to 14 and 4 times for electrophysiology and angioplasty catheters respectively.
Several experimental analyses elicited critical outcomes such as material modifications, functionality, residual bioburden, sterility and pyrogenic load after reprocessing. Furthermore the study faces juridical item by a comparative analysis and proposes a cost analysis model for saving evaluation.
This work was carried out in laboratory settings and therefore does not provide outcomes directly related to patients. In order to have a definitive answer about SUDs reuse feasibility in clinical settings, monitoring SUDs reuse efficacy and safeness on patients is mandatory, and multicentric clinical studies should be designed to evidence any causal link between reprocessing and adverse outcomes.
However, ethical constrains are present in using patients for clinical studies designed to determine the risk associated with SUDs reuse. This study addresses the procedural conditions to minimize the risk of failure and cross-infection associated with the reprocessed device, thus representing a propaedeutic approach for any following clinical trials.
Finally, according to the main worldwide investigations, SUDs reprocessing needs for the implementation of strict regulatory environment to guarantee patients safety and enable monitoring of reuse practices.
As a main result of the study, a list of recommendations was drafted.
The reprocessing protocol should be conceived according to material properties and design of the specific device model.
The efficacy of any reprocessing protocol should be verified by safe, reproducible, and regularly updated investigation techniques able to provide deep analyses of materials, functionality, and biological aspects.
Essential quality tests should be performed on every reprocessing cycle and on every single device.
Maximum number of reprocessing cycles should be specified according to devices features, use conditions, and reprocessing protocol.
Pre-sterilization processing conditions and techniques are critical for sterilization success.
Decontamination, cleaning, and washing procedures, together with sterilization techniques could induce chemical, physical and morphological modifications on the treated surfaces and potential toxicity of the sterilized device.
Complexity of reprocessing protocols, organizational issue, economic, and legal requirements addressed to qualifying and certifying all steps of the reprocessing procedure discourage “in house” reprocessing.