ArticleCureus2025
Carbon Footprint of Laparoscopic Appendicectomy: A Prospective Observational Study at a Tertiary Care NHS Trust Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Climate change is a significant global challenge as a result of rising greenhouse gas emissions. The National Health Service (NHS), as one of the biggest contributors to the United Kingdom's emissions, has a net-zero carbon emissions target. Operating theatres have a large resource burden in hospitals, and the laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) is one of the most commonly performed procedures. As of yet, the laparoscopic appendicectomy has not been effectively carbon footprinted. Aims The objective of this study is to calculate the carbon footprint of the laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) in grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) produced that results in an environmental impact. In addition, we also identify the biggest contributors to the carbon footprint and create a set of recommendations for CO2 emission reduction. Methods Carbon footprint-related data was collected for using surgical equipment, electricity utilisation and consumption of CO2 used for pneumoperitoneum, over 23 consecutive LAs. Peer-reviewed literature was used to determine the footprint of the equipment via a lifecycle assessment. The average carbon emissions for pneumoperitoneum, theatre overheads (mainly heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC)) and electrical equipment were calculated. Results The average CO2 emission for an appendicectomy was 28258±1256 (24381-36267) grams. Variation was largely secondary to prolonged operations (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient = 0.95) due to technical difficulties. Major contributors in carbon footprinting were pre-set (reusable items) (23%), pre-set (disposable items) (40%), theatre overheads (HVAC and lights) (16%), CO2 pneumoperitoneum (9%), scrubs and personal protective equipment (PPE) (6%), additional equipment (5%) and utilisation of electrical equipment (1%). Conclusion The LA is a carbon-intensive procedure. CO2 emissions from LAs may be reduced by switching over to reusable equipment and increasing operating room efficiency. The green theatre checklist provides excellent guidelines on this. More research is needed into less environmentally impactful gases to achieve a pneumoperitoneum. This study provides data to guide targeted interventions and quantify the degree of offsetting needed to achieve net-zero emissions for laparoscopic surgery.
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.