Carbon Footprint in Flexible Ureteroscopy: A Comparative Study on the Environmental Impact of Reusable and Single-Use Ureteroscopes

被引:116
|
作者
Davis, Niall F. [1 ]
McGrath, Shannon [1 ]
Quinlan, Mark [1 ]
Jack, Gregory [1 ]
Lawrentschuk, Nathan [1 ]
Bolton, Damien M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Austin Hosp, Dept Urol, Melbourne, Vic 3084, Australia
关键词
flexible ureteroscopy; carbon footprint; CO2; emissions; healthcare delivery; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; INSTRUMENTS;
D O I
10.1089/end.2018.0001
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: There are no comparative assessments on the environmental impact of endourologic instruments. We evaluated and compared the environmental impact of single-use flexible ureteroscopes with reusable flexible ureteroscopes. Patients and Methods: An analysis of the typical life cycle of the LithoVue (Boston Scientific) single-use digital flexible ureteroscope and Olympus Flexible Video Ureteroscope (URV-F) was performed. To measure the carbon footprint, data were obtained on manufacturing of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscopes and from typical uses obtained with a reusable scope, including repairs, replacement instruments, and ultimate disposal of both ureteroscopes. The solid waste generated (kg) and energy consumed (kWh) during each case were quantified and converted into their equivalent mass of carbon dioxide (kg of CO2) released. Results: Flexible ureteroscopic raw materials composed of plastic (90%), steel (4%), electronics (4%), and rubber (2%). The manufacturing cost of a flexible ureteroscope was 11.49kg of CO2 per 1kg of ureteroscope. The weight of the single-use LithoVue and URV-F flexible ureteroscope was 0.3 and 1kg, respectively. The total carbon footprint of the lifecycle assessment of the LithoVue was 4.43kg of CO2 per endourologic case. The total carbon footprint of the lifecycle of the reusable ureteroscope was 4.47kg of CO2 per case. Conclusion: The environmental impacts of the reusable flexible ureteroscope and the single-use flexible ureteroscope are comparable. Urologists should be aware that the typical life cycle of urologic instruments is a concerning source of environmental emissions.
引用
收藏
页码:214 / 217
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscopes: How Do They Compare with Reusable Ureteroscopes?
    Scotland, Kymora B.
    Chan, Justin Y. H.
    Chew, Ben H.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2019, 33 (02) : 71 - 78
  • [2] Comparative medico-economic study of reusable vs. single-use flexible ureteroscopes
    Al-Balushi, Khalid
    Martin, Nathalie
    Loubon, Helene
    Baboudjian, Michael
    Michel, Floriane
    Sichez, Pierre-Clement
    Martin, Thomas
    Di-Crocco, Eugenie
    Gaillet, Sarah
    Delaporte, Veronique
    Akiki, Akram
    Faure, Alice
    Karsenty, Gilles
    Lechevallier, Eric
    Boissier, Romain
    INTERNATIONAL UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 2019, 51 (10) : 1735 - 1741
  • [3] Comparative medico-economic study of reusable vs. single-use flexible ureteroscopes
    Khalid Al-Balushi
    Nathalie Martin
    Hélène Loubon
    Michael Baboudjian
    Floriane Michel
    Pierre-Clément Sichez
    Thomas Martin
    Eugénie Di-Crocco
    Sarah Gaillet
    Veronique Delaporte
    Akram Akiki
    Alice Faure
    Gilles Karsenty
    Eric Lechevallier
    Romain Boissier
    International Urology and Nephrology, 2019, 51 : 1735 - 1741
  • [4] Environmental impact of single-use and reusable flexible cystoscopes
    Kemble, Jayson P.
    Winoker, Jared S.
    Patel, Sunil H.
    Su, Zhuo T.
    Matlaga, Brian R.
    Potretzke, Aaron M.
    Koo, Kevin
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2023, 131 (05) : 617 - 622
  • [5] COMPARISON OF A NOVEL SINGLE-USE FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPE TO CURRENTLY EXISTING REUSABLE AND SINGLE-USE FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPES
    Wollin, Daniel
    Jiang, Ruiyang
    Radvak, Daniela
    Scales, Charles
    Ferrandino, Michael
    Simmons, W. Neal
    Preminger, Glenn
    Lipkin, Michael
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 197 (04): : E666 - E666
  • [6] Environmental Impact of Flexible Cystoscopy: A Comparative Analysis Between Carbon Footprint of Isiris® Single-Use Cystoscope and Reusable Flexible Cystoscope and a Systematic Review of Literature
    Jahrreiss, Victoria
    Sarrot, Pierre
    Davis, Niall F.
    Somani, Bhaskar
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2024, 38 (04) : 386 - 394
  • [7] An in vitro Comparative Assessment of Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscopes Using a Standardized Ureteroscopy Training Model
    So, Wei Zheng
    Gauhar, Vineet
    Chen, Kelven
    Lu, Jirong
    Chua, Wei Jin
    Tiong, Ho Yee
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2022, 106 (12) : 1279 - 1286
  • [8] The Carbon Footprint of Single-Use Flexible Cystoscopes Compared with Reusable Cystoscopes
    Hogan, Donnacha
    Rauf, Hammad
    Kinnear, Ned
    Hennessey, Derek Barry
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2022, 36 (11) : 1460 - 1464
  • [9] Comment on 'environmental impact of single-use and reusable flexible cystoscopes'
    Baboudjian, Michael
    Bastide, Cyrille
    Lechevallier, Eric
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2023, 131 (05) : 634 - 634
  • [10] ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH REUSABLE FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPES - IMPLICATIONS FOR THE UTILIZATION OF SINGLE-USE DIGITAL FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPES
    Kelly, T.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2023, 26 (12) : S163 - S163