ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
The environmental impact of multi-specialty robotic-assisted surgery: a waste audit analysis.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Environmental impact of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- [The environmentally friendly hospital : Perspectives and practical examples for urology].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Review
- Environmental stewardship and robotic surgery: innovation without compromise.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Twin Transformation in Cardiothoracic Surgery: The Convergence of Digital Innovation and Sustainability.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Environmental sustainability in robotic surgery: a data-driven bibliometric mapping of global research trends, thematic evolution, and knowledge structures (1983-2025).Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- An Expert Panel Review of Endoscopic Vein Harvesting Devices: Benefits, Limitations, and Clinical Insights.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Review
- A comparative analysis of the carbon footprint in minimally invasive colorectal surgery: laparoscopic versus robotic-the coloprint pilot study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Observational
- Comments on: "The environmental impact of multi-specialty robotic-assisted surgery: a waste audit".Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Comment on: "The environmental impact of multi‑specialty robotic‑assisted surgery: a waste audit analysis".Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern advances in medicine and technology have led to an increase in robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) cases. However, concerns have been raised about the potential environmental impact of RAS. Despite this, only limited quantitative evidence is currently available. Therefore, this study aims to objectively quantify the environmental impact of a multi-specialty RAS caseload at an Australian public tertiary hospital. An analysis was performed to quantify the amount of waste produced on a consecutive multi-specialty RAS caseload performed between August 2016 and March 2023 at a major public hospital. The weight of each instrument and consumable was measured and the total weight of discarded waste was calculated for each RAS case. A total of 671 patients underwent RAS using the da Vinci Xi System, including Urology (n = 341, 50.8%), Cardiothoracic (n = 158, 23.5%), Gynaecology (n = 107, 16.0%), and Colorectal (n = 65, 9.7%). Overall, the amount of waste was 2,948.9 kg, with single-use items contributing the largest volume (93.9%). Cardiothoracic generated the lowest average weight of waste per case (3.04 kg) while Colorectal generated the highest (5.27 kg). Overall, the da Vinci Xi instrument arm drape was the single item with the largest contribution to the total weight of waste (32.9%). RAS generates substantial waste, primarily from single-use items. These findings underscore the need for strategies to mitigate the environmental footprint of RAS as its adoption continues to grow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.