Demetrius L Woods1, Thomas McAndrew2, Nicole Nevadunsky2, June Y Hou2, Gary Goldberg2, Dennis Yi-Shin Kuo2, Sara Isani3. 1. Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Emory Midtown Hospital, Atlanta, GA, 30308, USA. 2. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Women's Health, Bronx, NY, USA. 3. Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Science, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date there have been no comprehensive, comparative assessments of the environmental impact of surgical modalities. Our study seeks to quantify and compare the total greenhouse gas emissions, or 'carbon footprint', attributable to three surgical modalities. METHODS: A review of 150 staging procedures, employing laparotomy (LAP), conventional laparoscopy (LSC) or robotically-assisted laparoscopy (RA-LSC), was performed. The solid waste generated (kg) and energy consumed (kWh) during each case were quantified and converted into their equivalent mass of carbon dioxide (kg CO(2) e) release into the environment. The carbon footprint is the sum of the waste production and energy consumption during each surgery (kg CO(2) e). RESULTS: The total carbon footprint of a RA-LSC procedure is 40.3 kg CO(2) e/patient (p < 0.01). This represents a 38% increase over that of LSC (29.2 kg CO(2) e/patient; p < 0.01) and a 77% increase over LAP (22.7 kg CO(2) e/patient; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide clinicians, administrators and policy-makers with knowledge of the environmental impact of their decisions to facilitate adoption of sustainable practices.
BACKGROUND: To date there have been no comprehensive, comparative assessments of the environmental impact of surgical modalities. Our study seeks to quantify and compare the total greenhouse gas emissions, or 'carbon footprint', attributable to three surgical modalities. METHODS: A review of 150 staging procedures, employing laparotomy (LAP), conventional laparoscopy (LSC) or robotically-assisted laparoscopy (RA-LSC), was performed. The solid waste generated (kg) and energy consumed (kWh) during each case were quantified and converted into their equivalent mass of carbon dioxide (kg CO(2) e) release into the environment. The carbon footprint is the sum of the waste production and energy consumption during each surgery (kg CO(2) e). RESULTS: The total carbon footprint of a RA-LSC procedure is 40.3 kg CO(2) e/patient (p < 0.01). This represents a 38% increase over that of LSC (29.2 kg CO(2) e/patient; p < 0.01) and a 77% increase over LAP (22.7 kg CO(2) e/patient; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide clinicians, administrators and policy-makers with knowledge of the environmental impact of their decisions to facilitate adoption of sustainable practices.
Authors: Rennie X Qin; Lotta Velin; Elizabeth F Yates; Omnia El Omrani; Elizabeth McLeod; Jemesa Tudravu; Lubna Samad; Alistair Woodward; Craig D McClain Journal: Lancet Reg Health West Pac Date: 2022-02-23
Authors: R Dotzauer; A La Torre; A Thomas; M P Brandt; K Böhm; R Mager; H Borgmann; W Jäger; M Kurosch; T Höfner; C Ruckes; A Haferkamp; I Tsaur Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-03-28 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jonathan Drew; Sean D Christie; Peter Tyedmers; Jenna Smith-Forrester; Daniel Rainham Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 9.031