7 key advantages of a large working channel
As part of our global market research, we asked 434 Gastroenterologists and GI Surgeons whether they thought a single-use therapeutic gastroscope would ease their accessibility to treat acute bleeding patients in the Intensive Care Unit compared to current practice. Over 80 percent of them responded that it would make a difference.
We believe a larger working channel can also make a positive difference in other procedures and in a variety of clinical settings with the following seven advantages:
1. You have a therapeutic gastroscope available whenever you need it.
With a single-use gastroscope, there is no more waiting when all the reusable gastroscopes are being used, reprocessed, in quarantine or out for repair. There are no more delays due to bottlenecks in the reprocessing workflow or due to broken-down reprocessing equipment.
2. You have powerful suctioning when you need it.
A larger working channel and increased suction power can facilitate the removal of blood, clots and debris in order to locate the bleeding source efficiently. With a large working channel, you can take advantage of improved suctioning while introducing haemostatic instruments.
3. It's fast and easy to set up.
With a brand new single-use scope, your staff can reduce time spent on pre-procedure tasks they would normally have to do. There's no need to check that the reprocessing procedures have been adequately performed and documented, or that the endoscope is free from defects. You simply connect the scope to the endoscopy system, attach the auxiliary equipment and get to work.
4. Gastroscope damage is one less thing to be concerned with.
Damaging a gastroscope, for example, when applying Histoacryl glue for haemostasis, can be costly in more ways than one. When you consider the price tag for repairs, the potential degradation of performance and the fact that the scope will be out of commission for a period of time, the costs add up.
5. You can improve safety for immunocompromised patients.
For vulnerable patients, the sterility of a single-use endoscope becomes that much more important. In addition, the potential costs associated with treating any infections caused by cross-contaminated reusable endoscopes become a non-issue when using a scope that is delivered sterile.
According to MAUDE*, there has been an overall increase in reported adverse events of 46% since 2010. Furthermore, from last year until September 2023, there has been an increase of reprocessing and contamination issues
* MAUDE - Manufacturer and user facility device experience
6. It enables the introduction and use of new and larger instruments.
Flexible endoscopy is swiftly progressing towards minimally invasive treatments and interventional procedures. A larger working channel would pave the way for you to utilise larger caliber tools, and for device manufacturers to design new and improved tools, to better impact patient outcomes.
7. It reduces hidden costs for your department and organisation.
There can be over 100, often complex and time-consuming steps involved in the reprocessing guidelines provided by authorities1. Every step, from pre-cleaning, leak-testing, rinsing, disinfecting and/or sterilising to drying, storing and transporting the endoscopes, represents another expense (and extra time consideration) to include in your cost calculations. The single-use concept not only eliminates these reprocessing costs, it also cuts material costs, such as cleaning detergents, water, brushes, personal protective equipment and human resources.
Learn more about the product, get a demo or request a quote.
Contact me
Please fill in the form, and we’ll contact you to answer any questions you might have about our single-use gastroscope solutions or to a arrange a demo at a convenient time.
Get more content like this in your Inbox
For the latest clinical evidence, procedure videos, articles and webinars on cost, workflow and outcome improvement, and new product and technology information, sign up for our GI e-newsletter.
References
1. Ofstead et al., 2017: A glimpse at the true cost of reprocessing endoscopes: Results of a pilot project.
