In this RCT investigating the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on the prevention of microbial contamination during EBUS-TBNA, chlorhexidine mouthrinse did not reduce CFU counts of aspiration needle wash samples. Results of sensitivity and subgroup analyses were consistent with this finding. The incidence of fever within 24 hours following EBUS-TBNA was not different between the groups. Infectious complications within 4 weeks after the procedure were not observed.
Previous studies have suggested that postprocedural infection is attributed to contamination of aspiration needles with oropharyngeal commensal bacteria during EBUS-TBNA [18, 19]. Contamination of the working channel of the EBUS bronchoscope could occur during its passage through the oropharynx, and the sterile aspiration needle could be contaminated by oropharyngeal commensal bacteria when it passes through the working channel of the EBUS bronchoscope. During transtracheal or transbronchial passage of the contaminated needle, microorganisms could be directly inoculated into punctured LNs. Several studies reported that contamination of aspiration needles with oropharyngeal commensal bacteria is common [8, 15]. In one study, needle wash cultures were positive in 35% of patients undergoing EBUS-TBNA [8]. In another study showing that endobronchial intubation could prevent contamination by oropharyngeal bacteria during EBUS-TBNA, needle wash cultures were positive in all patients without endobronchial tubes but in only 3% of those with the tubes [15]. Thus, we speculated that oral hygiene has a role as a preventive strategy to reduce infectious complications following EBUS-TBNA. Chlorhexidine mouthrinse has been commonly used not only in dental practice but also in critical care to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia [20]. Moreover, a previous RCT showed that chlorhexidine mouthrinse before gastroscopy was effective in reducing microbial contamination of the endoscope, resulting in an 88% reduction of the median CFU count of wash samples from the working channel of the endoscope [16]. In this context, we investigated the effect of chlorhexidine mouthrinse on the reduction of microbial contamination during EBUS-TBNA. Chlorhexidine mouthrinse before EBUS-TBNA did not result in a statistically significant reduction in CFU counts of aspiration needle wash samples. However, we performed quantitative cultures of aspiration needle wash samples and bacterial identification using MALDI-TOF MS instead of the traditional technique of biochemical identification, adding strength to the methods used in this RCT.
Potential risk factors for infectious complication after EBUS-TBNA include target lesions with necrotic, cystic, or avascular features and the performance of EUS-B-FNA [10, 18, 19, 21]. The proposed mechanism of infective complications is that decreased blood flow through necrotic lesions could compromise bacterial clearance [19], and repeated puncture by aspiration needles via the esophagus could inoculate esophageal commensal bacteria into the mediastinal target lesions [21]. Although other patient and procedural characteristics in this RCT including the performance of EUS-B-FNA were not significantly different between the chlorhexidine mouthrinse group and the usual care group, the patients with target lesions with coagulation necrosis sign on ultrasound or aspirates with pus-like material were more common in the chlorhexidine mouthrinse group (19.6% vs 5.5%; P = 0.03; Table 2). The chlorhexidine mouthrinse patients with higher risk of postprocedural infection showed slightly lower CFU counts in aerobic culture, which did not reach statistical significance, suggesting the possibility of its role in reducing microbial contamination during EBUS-TBNA. However, further analyses were limited because such characteristics of target lesions were post-randomization measures.
Although infectious complications were not observed in this study, we found that bacteria identified from needle wash samples were consistent with common causative bacteria of infectious complications after EBUS-TBNA. In this study, oropharyngeal commensal bacteria were found in 39.2% of patients in the chlorhexidine mouthrinse group and in 49.1% of patients in the usual care group, and the genus Streptococcus was the most abundant in both groups. Oropharyngeal commensal bacteria such as the genera Streptococcus, Actinomyces, Gemella, and Prevotella were frequently reported as pathogens, and genus Streptococcus was identified as the pathogen in 14 of 29 cases of mediastinal infectious complications after EBUS-TBNA [14].
Bacteria that are not generally considered oropharyngeal commensal bacteria were identified in half of the patients in both groups. This could be explained in three ways. First, they could be transitory species in the oropharynx. Second, they could shift from transitory species to colonizers in the oropharynx according to oral health and immune status [22]. As immunocompromised individuals were excluded from the study, poor oral hygiene could be the reason for the shift. The risk factors for periodontal disease include male sex, smoking, and diabetes [23], which were frequently observed in the study patients. Third, bacteria at the lower respiratory tract could contaminate the aspiration needle after being deployed from the sheath.
Our study had several limitations. First, as the sample size was estimated on the basis of an RCT in patients undergoing gastroscopy with or without chlorhexidine mouthrinse [16], it was insufficient to determine the effects of chlorhexidine mouthrinse during EBUS-TBNA. There was no provision for interim analysis in the study protocol [11]. Second, the primary outcome, the CFU count of needle wash samples, was a surrogate marker for the risk of infectious complications associated with EBUS-TBNA. However, adequately powered studies with the primary outcome of infective complications itself would be difficult to perform considering the low incidence of infective complications following this procedure. Third, wash samples obtained from the inner channel of the EBUS bronchoscope rather than the aspiration needle could be another surrogate marker in this study. Fourth, although we excluded patients using antiseptic mouthrinse, oral hygiene was not examined in the current study. However, subgroup analyses according to risk factors for periodontal disease such as age, sex, smoking status, and the presence of diabetes did not show differences between the subgroups. Fifth, the findings of this study may not be generalized to mouthrinse with different concentrations of chlorhexidine and different frequencies and periods of rinsing. Chlorhexidine shows different effects at different concentrations – this antimicrobial agent is bacteriostatic at low concentrations, whereas it is bactericidal at higher concentrations [24].