Assessing the carbon footprint of inhalation anaesthesia, total intravenous anaesthesia, and spinal anaesthesia for a single surgical procedure: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND

Healthcare contributes substantially to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and anaesthesia is recognised as a high-impact sector. Evidence comparing the carbon footprint of anaesthetic techniques remains limited, particularly in Europe. We quantified carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions from inhalation anaesthesia with low-flow sevoflurane, TIVA and spinal anaesthesia during operative hysteroscopy.

METHODS

We performed a prospective GHG-focused life cycle assessment of consecutive patients undergoing operative hysteroscopy in a French university hospital. For each case, we recorded gases, drugs, medical devices, electricity consumption, and their respective costs. Carbon footprints were calculated by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris Carebone® platform and expressed in CO2e.

RESULTS

We included 123 participants: 72 underwent inhalation anaesthesia, 22 underwent TIVA, and 29 underwent spinal anaesthesia. Total carbon emissions differed significantly across techniques: median emissions were 10.8 kgCO2e [9.1-12.6] for inhalation anaesthesia, 6.6 kgCO2e [6.4-6.9] for TIVA and 5.5 kgCO2e [5.3-6.2] for spinal anaesthesia (P<0.001). Volatile anaesthetics were the main contributors for inhalation anaesthesia, pharmaceuticals for TIVA and single-use devices for spinal anaesthesia. Electricity consumption was similar across groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal anaesthesia demonstrated the lowest carbon footprint. TIVA represented the lowest-carbon option for general anaesthesia techniques, whereas inhalation anaesthesia yielded the highest CO2e emissions despite low-flow delivery. These findings highlight the mitigation potential of anaesthetic choice even in low-complexity procedures.