Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2025
Endoscopic En Bloc vs Piecemeal Resection of Large Colonic Adenomas: Carbon Footprint Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Grau Raphaëlle, Cottinet Pierre-Jean, Le Minh-Quyen, Schaefer Marion, Wallenhorst Timothée, Rösch Thomas, Lépilliez Vincent, Chaussade Stanislas, Rivory Jérôme, Legros Romain, Chevaux Jean-Baptiste, Leblanc Sarah, Lafeuille Pierre, Rostain Florian, Rodriguez de Santiago Enrique, Pohl Heiko, Baddeley Robin, Grinberg Daniel, Buiron Charles, Cunha Neves João A, Barret Maximilien, Albouys Jérémie, Belle Arthur, Lepetit Hugo, Dahan Martin, Jacquette Franck, Masgnaux Louis-Jean, Marais Loic, Ponchon Thierry, Jacques Jérémie, Pioche Mathieu
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopy makes a significant contribution to the carbon footprint of healthcare. A randomized trial (RESECT-COLON) demonstrated that endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) decreases the recurrence rate of large adenomas (>25 mm) vs piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (P-EMR), reducing the need for follow-up colonoscopy. We aimed to compare the carbon footprint of those 2 strategies.
METHODS: Devices used for both procedures were collected prospectively for each of the 359 patients. P-EMR and ESD were assessed using the life cycle assessment, evaluating 4 parameters: endoscopes and disposable medical products, electricity consumption, anesthetic products, and patient transport. The carbon footprint of the follow-up was simulated in both arms with different scenarios. We performed a post hoc analysis of the carbon footprint of these 2 strategies over 18 months.
RESULTS: Carbon footprint of a single P-EMR procedure was 63.5 kg carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) vs 73.2 kg CO2e for ESD (half for patient transport). Including follow-up in local centers, P-EMR generates 93.5 kg CO2e and ESD 76.3 kg CO2e, corresponding to an absolute reduction of 17 kg CO2e (18%) per procedure for ESD. Simulating a strategy of P-EMR resection and follow-up both performed in local centers, the global impact with 18 months follow-up would be 67.3 kg CO2e, favoring P-EMR over ESD.
CONCLUSIONS: ESD strategy for lesions over 25 mm could reduce the environmental impact by reducing the associated follow-up colonoscopies and transports of patients. If P-EMR could be performed in local centers with similar quality, results would be in favor of local P-EMR.
METHODS: Devices used for both procedures were collected prospectively for each of the 359 patients. P-EMR and ESD were assessed using the life cycle assessment, evaluating 4 parameters: endoscopes and disposable medical products, electricity consumption, anesthetic products, and patient transport. The carbon footprint of the follow-up was simulated in both arms with different scenarios. We performed a post hoc analysis of the carbon footprint of these 2 strategies over 18 months.
RESULTS: Carbon footprint of a single P-EMR procedure was 63.5 kg carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) vs 73.2 kg CO2e for ESD (half for patient transport). Including follow-up in local centers, P-EMR generates 93.5 kg CO2e and ESD 76.3 kg CO2e, corresponding to an absolute reduction of 17 kg CO2e (18%) per procedure for ESD. Simulating a strategy of P-EMR resection and follow-up both performed in local centers, the global impact with 18 months follow-up would be 67.3 kg CO2e, favoring P-EMR over ESD.
CONCLUSIONS: ESD strategy for lesions over 25 mm could reduce the environmental impact by reducing the associated follow-up colonoscopies and transports of patients. If P-EMR could be performed in local centers with similar quality, results would be in favor of local P-EMR.