The TJF model line is the Olympus duodenoscope used in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) — the procedure for visualizing and treating the bile duct, pancreatic duct, and gallbladder. The "TJF-Q180V" was the dominant U.S. duodenoscope from the early 2000s through the 2010s. Its successor, the "TJF-Q190V," was introduced as Olympus's response to the very contamination problem that made the TJF-Q180V notorious. Knowing which one was used in your procedure tells you something specific about the case.
The Short Version
TJF-Q180V: the original closed-channel elevator design, on the U.S. market from approximately 2010. The device that drove the duodenoscope-contamination crisis and that the FDA singled out in repeated safety communications from 2013 onward. Recalled and updated several times. Procedure date in the 2010s? Most likely this is what was used.
TJF-Q190V: the redesigned successor model, FDA-cleared in 2019, marketed as having a disposable distal end-cap and modified elevator mechanism. Procedure date in 2020 or later? Either model could have been used; the question depends on the facility.
Why The Model Number Matters
The Olympus duodenoscope litigation is, at its core, a product liability case about a specific design defect: the closed-channel elevator mechanism at the distal tip of the scope, which cannot be reliably cleaned and disinfected between patients using standard reprocessing protocols. The defect was inherent in the TJF-Q180V design as originally sold in the United States.
Olympus's litigation defense has, in part, attempted to draw a line between the TJF-Q180V (acknowledged design issues, multiple modifications) and the TJF-Q190V (marketed as solving those issues). The reality is more complicated. The TJF-Q190V has its own documented infection-cluster reports. The June 2025 FDA import alert covered both model lines and 56 other Olympus device models. Either way, model identification is the second piece of the qualification analysis after the basic "was an Olympus scope used" question.
How To Tell Them Apart from Records
Visually, the two scopes look nearly identical to a patient or family member. The differences are inside the device and in the model number printed on the body. To know which one was used, you need records, not memory.
The Operative Report
Most operative reports for ERCP procedures identify the scope by manufacturer and model. Look in the "Equipment" or "Devices" section of the report. The model number will appear as "TJF-Q180V" or "TJF-Q190V" — sometimes written as "Olympus TJFQ180V" or "TJF Q-180V" with variations in spacing and hyphens. The serial number of the specific scope is often also recorded.
The Endoscopy Suite Device Log
Endoscopy units are required to keep a device tracking log that records, for each procedure, which specific scope (by serial number) was used. This log is more detailed than the operative report and is the most authoritative source for model and serial identification. Records requests for this log are not always granted on the first ask — in some hospitals it lives in the biomedical or sterile processing department rather than the medical records office.
Reprocessing and Sterilization Records
Hospital reprocessing logs (the records of cleaning and disinfecting the scope after each use) record the device serial number for chain-of-custody purposes. These logs sometimes survive longer than the procedure records themselves and can identify the device retrospectively.
Hospital Purchasing and Capital Equipment Records
Most hospitals maintain capital equipment inventories that track which devices were on hand on which dates. If the operative report and device log are unavailable, working backward from the facility's purchasing history can identify which models were in service during the procedure date.
Other Olympus Models That Appear in Scope-Infection Cases
ERCP is not the only procedure where Olympus scopes have been implicated. Several other model lines appear in scope-infection cases:
- TJF-160F, TJF-160VF, TJF-Q180V, TJF-Q190V — duodenoscope models (ERCP).
- CF-H180AL/I, CF-HQ190L/I, CF-Q180AL/I, PCF series — colonoscope models.
- GIF-H180, GIF-H190, GIF-Q180, GIF-XP190N — gastroscope models used in upper endoscopy.
- BF-1T180, BF-1TQ190, BF-MP160F, BF-P190 — bronchoscope models.
The FDA's June 2025 import alert specifically named 58 Olympus device models manufactured at the company's Aizu, Japan facility. The full list is published by the FDA and we cross-reference it as part of every case workup.
What If The Records Are Vague?
Not every operative report names the scope by model. Some say only "duodenoscope" or "side-viewing endoscope." In those cases, model identification has to come from the device tracking log, reprocessing records, or hospital purchasing records. If the hospital initially resists the records request, the firm follows up with formal HIPAA demands and, if necessary, subpoenas after litigation is filed.
Our companion piece on how to find out which scope was used on you walks through the records request language in more detail.
What If The Scope Was a Different Brand?
Olympus is not the only duodenoscope manufacturer. Fujifilm and Pentax also make duodenoscopes that have been subject to FDA scrutiny. If your procedure used a Fujifilm or Pentax device, the underlying contamination concerns are real but the litigation framework is different and the bellwether cases are not the Olympus cases. We evaluate non-Olympus scope cases on a case-by-case basis.
Timeline Considerations
Different states have different statutes of limitations, and many states recognize a discovery rule that starts the clock at the date the patient knew (or reasonably should have known) the infection was linked to the scope. The June 2025 FDA import alert was significant for the discovery analysis because it was widely reported and is often the date courts treat as "constructive notice" of the scope link. Our piece on how long you have to file walks through the timing rules in more detail.
What To Do Next
- Request the operative report for your ERCP or other endoscopic procedure. Ask specifically for the equipment/device section.
- Request the endoscopy unit's device tracking log for the date of your procedure.
- Save culture and lab reports identifying any post-procedure infection — especially anything naming CRE, MRSA, Pseudomonas, or another multi-drug-resistant organism.
- Do not delay because of the statute of limitations. Each state's deadline is different, and the discovery rule analysis is fact-specific.
A free case review takes about 15 minutes by phone. We represent patients nationwide. There is no fee unless we recover money for you.
Sources
- U.S. Food & Drug Administration — "Reprocessing of Reusable Medical Devices: Information for Health Care Providers." fda.gov
- U.S. Food & Drug Administration — "Import Alerts for Certain Olympus Medical Devices Manufactured in Japan." fda.gov
- U.S. FDA MAUDE Adverse Event Database. accessdata.fda.gov
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — "Healthcare-Associated Infections: Duodenoscopes." cdc.gov
Need to Find Out Which Scope Was Used?
The 3-part qualification test takes 2 minutes. No Fees Unless We Recover Money for You.