Feasibility of a Green Breast Surgery Protocol to Reduce Carbon Footprint of Care: BuGS Trial Interim Results

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: Our objective was to evaluate the clinical feasibility and sustainability of an awake breast conserving surgery (BCS) protocol integrating opioid-free anesthesia, telemedicine, and environmental sustainability compared to standard care. <b>Methods</b>: A prospective, monocentric, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (133.24 CET2 ptv; NCT06624917) named Breast Green Surgery (BuGS) was planned. Women aged 18-75 years eligible for level I BCS were randomized to either the BuGS group-comprising opioid-free monitored anesthesia care (MAC), a telehealth follow-up, and intraoperative waste reduction-or the control. The primary endpoint was postoperative pain at rest (PPR) and during movement (PPD) both at 24 h, measured with the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Secondary exploratory endpoints included SF-36, PSQ-18, TSQ test, LOS, and KgCO<sub>2</sub> equivalent (KgCO<sub>2</sub>e) from surgical waste, patient transport, and complications. The interim analysis included patients completing a 30-day follow-up by 31 December 2024. <b>Results</b>: A total of 45 patients were enrolled (BuGS n = 18, control n = 27). While disproportionate, no significant differences were observed in PPR/PPD at 24 h (4.75 (3.725-5.875) vs. 4.5 (4.15-5.35); <i>p</i> = 0.626; 4 (3.10-4.75) vs. 4.6 (3.90-5.2); <i>p</i> = 0.130), confirmed using group ANOVA analysis (<i>p</i> = 0.515; <i>p</i> = 0.779, respectively). The BuGS group reported a reduced surgical room occupation (80.03 (64.84-101.87) vs. 133.23 (95.47-144.25) min; <i>p</i> = 0.002) and length of stay (0 (0-1) vs. 1 (1-2); <i>p</i> = 0.0001), without hospital unplanned admissions. Reduced KgCO<sub>2</sub>e emissions from waste disposal were reported, with no difference in SF-36, PSQ-18, and complication rates. <b>Conclusions</b>: If confirmed after complete accrual, BuGS could potentially promote a clinically equivalent, environmentally sustainable, and hospital efficient surgery without affecting the QoL of our patients. Further multicentric validation is warranted.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2025-09-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14196881
Primary Topic
Climate Change and Health Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Feasibility of a Green Breast Surgery Protocol to Reduce Carbon Footprint of Care: BuGS Trial Interim Results

Denisa Eskiu, Marco Materazzo, Federico Tacconi, Gianluca Vanni et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Climate Change and Health Impacts
article

Feasibility of a Green Breast Surgery Protocol to Reduce Carbon Footprint of Care: BuGS Trial Interim Results

Denisa Eskiu, Marco Materazzo, Federico Tacconi, Gianluca Vanni, Marco Pellicciaro, Oreste Claudio Buonomo, JONATHAN CASPI, Massimiliano Berretta, Benedetto Longo, Giordana Di Mauro, V Cervelli
article en

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: Our objective was to evaluate the clinical feasibility and sustainability of an awake breast conserving surgery (BCS) protocol integrating opioid-free anesthesia, telemedicine, and environmental sustainability compared to standard care. <b>Methods</b>: A prospective, monocentric, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (133.24 CET2 ptv; NCT06624917) named Breast Green Surgery (BuGS) was planned. Women aged 18-75 years eligible for level I BCS were randomized to either the BuGS group-comprising opioid-free monitored anesthesia care (MAC), a telehealth follow-up, and intraoperative waste reduction-or the control. The primary endpoint was postoperative pain at rest (PPR) and during movement (PPD) both at 24 h, measured with the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Secondary exploratory endpoints included SF-36, PSQ-18, TSQ test, LOS, and KgCO<sub>2</sub> equivalent (KgCO<sub>2</sub>e) from surgical waste, patient transport, and complications. The interim analysis included patients completing a 30-day follow-up by 31 December 2024. <b>Results</b>: A total of 45 patients were enrolled (BuGS n = 18, control n = 27). While disproportionate, no significant differences were observed in PPR/PPD at 24 h (4.75 (3.725-5.875) vs. 4.5 (4.15-5.35); <i>p</i> = 0.626; 4 (3.10-4.75) vs. 4.6 (3.90-5.2); <i>p</i> = 0.130), confirmed using group ANOVA analysis (<i>p</i> = 0.515; <i>p</i> = 0.779, respectively). The BuGS group reported a reduced surgical room occupation (80.03 (64.84-101.87) vs. 133.23 (95.47-144.25) min; <i>p</i> = 0.002) and length of stay (0 (0-1) vs. 1 (1-2); <i>p</i> = 0.0001), without hospital unplanned admissions. Reduced KgCO<sub>2</sub>e emissions from waste disposal were reported, with no difference in SF-36, PSQ-18, and complication rates. <b>Conclusions</b>: If confirmed after complete accrual, BuGS could potentially promote a clinically equivalent, environmentally sustainable, and hospital efficient surgery without affecting the QoL of our patients. Further multicentric validation is warranted.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 14(19)
University of Messina (IT), University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT), University of Basilicata (IT), Policlinico Tor Vergata (IT), Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
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.