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 19 条
  • [1] Comparison of economic and environmental impacts between disposable and reusable instruments used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Adler, S
    Scherrer, M
    Rückauer, KD
    Daschner, FD
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2005, 19 (02): : 268 - 272
  • [2] The carbon footprints of home and in-center peritoneal dialysis in China
    Chen, Mindong
    Zhou, Rong
    Du, Chongbo
    Meng, Fulei
    Wang, Yanli
    Wu, Liping
    Wang, Fang
    Xu, Yahong
    Yang, Xiufen
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 2017, 49 (02) : 337 - 343
  • [3] Costello A, 2009, LANCET, V373, P1693, DOI [10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60935-1, 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60929-6]
  • [4] Davis NF, 2017, WORLD J UROL
  • [5] Carbon footprint reduction: a critical study of rubber production in small and medium scale enterprises in Sri Lanka
    Dayaratne, Sampath P.
    Gunawardana, Kennedy D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2015, 103 : 87 - 103
  • [6] Dettenkofer M, 1999, CHIRURG, V70, P485, DOI 10.1007/s001040050677
  • [7] ICAO, CARB EM CALC ICAO
  • [8] Jurg, 2009, PLAST BAGS PLAST BOT
  • [9] Ki-moon B, 2008, KYOTO PROTOCOL REFER
  • [10] Kummerer K., 1996, INT J LIFE CYCLE ASS, V1, P67, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF02978647