The impact of radical prostatectomy on global climate: a prospective multicentre study comparing laparoscopic versus robotic surgery

被引:11
|
作者
Fuschi, Andrea [1 ]
Pastore, Antonio Luigi [1 ]
Al Salhi, Yazan [1 ]
Martoccia, Alessia [1 ]
De Nunzio, Cosimo [2 ]
Tema, Giorgia [2 ]
Rera, Onofrio Antonio [1 ]
Carbone, Flavia [3 ]
Asimakopoulos, Anastasios D. [4 ]
Sequi, Manfredi Bruno [1 ]
Valenzi, Fabio Maria [1 ]
Suraci, Paolo Pietro [1 ]
Scalzo, Silvio [1 ]
Del Giudice, Francesco [5 ]
Nardecchia, Stefano [6 ]
Bozzini, Giorgio [7 ]
Corsini, Alessandro [6 ]
Sciarra, Alessandro [5 ]
Carbone, Antonio [1 ]
机构
[1] Sapienza Univ Rome, Fac Pharm & Med, Dept Med Surg Sci & Biotechnol, Urol Unit, Latina, Italy
[2] Sapienza Univ Rome, St Andrea Hosp, Dept Urol, Rome, Italy
[3] Nonprofit Assoc Res Urol, Urores, Latina, Italy
[4] Fdn PTV Policlin Tor Vergata, Unit Urol, Rome, Italy
[5] Sapienza Univ Rome, Dept Urol, Policlin Umberto 1, Rome, Italy
[6] Sapienza Univ Rome, Dept Mech & Aerosp Engn, Rome, Italy
[7] ASST Lariana St Anna Hosp, Dept Urol, Como, Italy
关键词
LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; CARBON FOOTPRINT; HEALTH-CARE; CANCER;
D O I
10.1038/s41391-023-00672-4
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: More than 4% of the global greenhouse gas emissions are generated by healthcare system. Focusing on the environmental impact of minimally invasive surgery, we assessed and compared the CO2 emissions between Robot-assisted (RALP) and Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (LRP). Methods: In patients prospectively enrolled, we evaluated the age, surgical and anesthesiologic time, postoperative intensive care unit and hospital stay, blood transfusion, pre- and postoperative hemoglobin and Gleason score, open conversion need, and complications (Clavien-Dindo classification). We assessed the life cycle to estimate the energy consumption for surgical procedures and hospital stays. We reported the materials, CO2 produced, and fluid quantity infused and dispersed. Disposable and reusable materials and instruments were weighed and divided into metal, plastic, and composite fibers. The CO2 consumption for disposal and decontamination was also evaluated. Results: Of the 223 patients investigated, 119 and 104 patients underwent RALP and LRP, respectively. The two groups were comparable as regards age and preoperative Gleason score. The laparoscopic and robotic instruments weighed 1733 g and 1737 g, respectively. The CO2 emissions due to instrumentation were higher in the laparoscopic group, with the majority coming from plastic and composite fiber components. The CO2 emissions for metal components were higher in the robotic group. The robot functioned at 3.5 kW/h, producing 4 kg/h of CO2. The laparoscopic column operated at 600 W/h, emitting similar to 1 kg/h of CO2. The operating room operated at 3,0 kW/h. The operating time was longer in the laparoscopic group, resulting in higher CO2 emissions. CO2 emissions from hospital room energy consumption were lower in the robot-assisted group. The total CO2 emissions were similar to 47 kg and similar to 60 kg per procedure in the robot-assisted and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Conclusions: RALP generates substantially less CO2 than LRP owing to the use of more reusable surgical supplies, shorter operative time and hospital stay.
引用
收藏
页码:272 / 278
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Pure laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Comparative study to assess functional urinary outcomes
    Gosseine, P. -N.
    Mangin, P.
    Leclers, F.
    Cormier, L.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2009, 19 (09): : 611 - 618
  • [32] Positive margins in open radical prostatectomy versus robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. A single surgeon series
    Weerakoon, M.
    Sethi, K.
    Ischia, J.
    Sengupta, S.
    Webb, D.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 107 : 18 - 18
  • [33] Prospective Randomized Study of Radiofrequency Versus Ultrasound Scalpels on Functional Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy
    Pastore, Antonio Luigi
    Palleschi, Giovanni
    Silvestri, Luigi
    Leto, Antonino
    Sacchi, Kevin
    Pacini, Luca
    Petrozza, Vincenzo
    Carbone, Antonio
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2013, 27 (08) : 989 - 993
  • [34] Prospective comparison of short-term convalescence: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Bhayani, SB
    Pavlovich, CP
    Hsu, TS
    Sullivan, W
    Su, LM
    UROLOGY, 2003, 61 (03) : 612 - 616
  • [35] LAPPRO: A prospective multicentre comparative study of robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer
    Thorsteinsdottir, Thordis
    Stranne, Johan
    Carlsson, Stefan
    Anderberg, Bo
    Bjorholt, Ingela
    Damber, Jan-Erik
    Hugosson, Jonas
    Wilderang, Ulrica
    Wiklund, Peter
    Steineck, Gunnar
    Haglind, Eva
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 2011, 45 (02): : 102 - 112
  • [36] Impact of prior abdominal surgery on the outcomes after robotic - assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: single center experience
    Kishimoto, Nozomu
    Takao, Tetsuya
    Yamamichi, Gaku
    Okusa, Takuya
    Taniguchi, Ayumu
    Tsutahara, Koichi
    Tanigawa, Go
    Yamaguchi, Seiji
    INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2016, 42 (05): : 918 - 924
  • [37] Robotic-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery: Outcomes from the First Multicentre, Randomised, Patient-blinded Controlled Trial in Radical Prostatectomy (LAP-01)
    Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
    Holze, Sigrun
    Neuhaus, Petra
    Kyriazis, Iason
    Do, Hoang Minh
    Dietel, Anja
    Truss, Michael C.
    Grzella, Corinn, I
    Teber, Dogu
    Hohenfellner, Markus
    Rabenalt, Robert
    Albers, Peter
    Mende, Meinhard
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2021, 79 (06) : 750 - 759
  • [38] Prospective study for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using intrafascial technique
    Tak, Sung Gyung
    Hyo, Kim Tae
    Han, Yoon Jin
    Jin, Kwak Jae
    Wan, Lee
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2007, 21 : A32 - A32
  • [39] Ten-year outcome of a prospective randomised trial comparing laparoscopic versus robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Checcucci, E.
    Alladio, E.
    De Cillis, S.
    Granato, S.
    Amparore, D.
    Piana, A.
    Piramide, F.
    Volpi, G.
    Sica, M.
    Verri, P.
    Piscitello, S.
    Carbonaro, B.
    Meziere, J.
    Zamengo, D.
    Della Corte, M.
    Pecoraro, A.
    Cattaneo, G.
    Di Dio, M.
    Manfredi, M.
    Porpiglia, F.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2022, 81 : S1714 - S1715
  • [40] The impact of robotic radical prostatectomy on open surgery in a district general hospital
    McCauley, Nadine
    Carter, Adam
    Wilson, Jim
    Cox, Adam
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2024, 134 : 35 - 35