Carbon footprint assessment and sensitivity analysis of diagnostic colonoscopy

This study performed a multifactorial carbon footprint assessment and sensitivity analysis of colonoscopy.This was a 1-week, single-center, prospective study including all outpatient diagnostic colonoscopies (n = 66). A cradle-to-grave life-cycle assessment methodology evaluated all essential supplies (accessories #1-15), endoscopic procedure (energy consumption, carbon dioxide [CO2] insufflation, bowel preparation, sedation), staff and patient transport, and waste management. The impact assessment was based on sensitivity analysis in different scenarios (base, best, worst) to calculate the Global Warming Potential over 100 years (GWP-100 measured in kg of CO2 equivalent [kgCO2e]).GWP-100 of a single colonoscopy was estimated to be 18.09 kgCO2e in the base scenario, with patient (8.61 kgCO2e) and staff (5.09 kgCO2e) transport, colonoscope manufacture and reprocessing (2.1 kgCO2e), and supplies (1.91 kgCO2e) contributing 47.6%, 28.1%, 11.7%, and 10.6%, respectively. Nitrile gloves, underpads, and a disposable peripheral oxygen saturation sensor accounted for nearly 50% of the total carbon footprint of all supplies. Patient preparation (bowel preparation, sedation, and CO2 insufflation) and energy consumption contributed only 2.0%. Staff and patient travel showed significant variations among worst, base, and best scenarios, with 18.8, 13.7, and 10.2 kgCO2e, respectively. The use of different amounts of medical supplies raised the carbon footprint to 2.38 kgCO2e in the worst scenario or diminished it to 1.56 kgCO2e in the best case.This analysis and multifactorial colonoscopy procedure assessment confirmed patient and staff transport as the main carbon footprint contributors. More sustainable and smarter transport could considerably lower the environmental impact of colonoscopy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Endoscopy
Published
2025-09-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2695-1726
Primary Topic
Climate Change and Health Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Carbon footprint assessment and sensitivity analysis of diagnostic colonoscopy

Guillermo Vilariño‐Feltrer, Ana Vidaurre, Rubén Martín‐Cabezuelo, Heiko Pohl et al.
Endoscopy
Climate Change and Health Impacts
article

Carbon footprint assessment and sensitivity analysis of diagnostic colonoscopy

Guillermo Vilariño‐Feltrer, Ana Vidaurre, Rubén Martín‐Cabezuelo, Heiko Pohl, Isabel Tort-Ausina, Vicente Lorenzo‐Zúñiga, Vicente Pons, Alberto J. Campillo-Fernández, Marina García-Castellanos
article en

Abstract

This study performed a multifactorial carbon footprint assessment and sensitivity analysis of colonoscopy.This was a 1-week, single-center, prospective study including all outpatient diagnostic colonoscopies (n = 66). A cradle-to-grave life-cycle assessment methodology evaluated all essential supplies (accessories #1-15), endoscopic procedure (energy consumption, carbon dioxide [CO2] insufflation, bowel preparation, sedation), staff and patient transport, and waste management. The impact assessment was based on sensitivity analysis in different scenarios (base, best, worst) to calculate the Global Warming Potential over 100 years (GWP-100 measured in kg of CO2 equivalent [kgCO2e]).GWP-100 of a single colonoscopy was estimated to be 18.09 kgCO2e in the base scenario, with patient (8.61 kgCO2e) and staff (5.09 kgCO2e) transport, colonoscope manufacture and reprocessing (2.1 kgCO2e), and supplies (1.91 kgCO2e) contributing 47.6%, 28.1%, 11.7%, and 10.6%, respectively. Nitrile gloves, underpads, and a disposable peripheral oxygen saturation sensor accounted for nearly 50% of the total carbon footprint of all supplies. Patient preparation (bowel preparation, sedation, and CO2 insufflation) and energy consumption contributed only 2.0%. Staff and patient travel showed significant variations among worst, base, and best scenarios, with 18.8, 13.7, and 10.2 kgCO2e, respectively. The use of different amounts of medical supplies raised the carbon footprint to 2.38 kgCO2e in the worst scenario or diminished it to 1.56 kgCO2e in the best case.This analysis and multifactorial colonoscopy procedure assessment confirmed patient and staff transport as the main carbon footprint contributors. More sustainable and smarter transport could considerably lower the environmental impact of colonoscopy.

Endoscopy
Dartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center (US), Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES), University of Vermont Medical Center (US), Valencia Catholic University Saint Vincent Martyr (ES), Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe (ES), White River Junction VA Medical Center (US), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (ES), Universitat Politècnica de València (ES)
European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Instituto de Salud Carlos III
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Climate Change and Health Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.