Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 article

Assessing the carbon footprint of inhalation anaesthesia, total intravenous anaesthesia, and spinal anaesthesia for a single surgical procedure: a prospective observational study

0Citations signalées — pas une note de qualité
4Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Résumé fourni par la source

Background Healthcare contributes substantially to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and anaesthesia is recognised as a high-impact sector. Evidence comparing the carbon footprint of anaesthetic techniques remains limited, particularly in Europe. We quantified carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 e) emissions from inhalation anaesthesia with low-flow sevoflurane, TIVA and spinal anaesthesia during operative hysteroscopy. Methods We performed a prospective GHG-focused life cycle assessment of consecutive patients undergoing operative hysteroscopy in a French university hospital. For each case, we recorded gases, drugs, medical devices, electricity consumption, and their respective costs. Carbon footprints were calculated by Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris Carebone® platform and expressed in CO 2 e. Results We included 123 participants: 72 underwent inhalation anaesthesia, 22 underwent TIVA, and 29 underwent spinal anaesthesia. Total carbon emissions differed significantly across techniques: median emissions were 10.8 kgCO 2 e [9.1–12.6] for inhalation anaesthesia, 6.6 kgCO 2 e [6.4–6.9] for TIVA and 5.5 kgCO 2 e [5.3–6.2] for spinal anaesthesia ( P <0.001). Volatile anaesthetics were the main contributors for inhalation anaesthesia, pharmaceuticals for TIVA and single-use devices for spinal anaesthesia. Electricity consumption was similar across groups. Conclusions Spinal anaesthesia demonstrated the lowest carbon footprint. TIVA represented the lowest-carbon option for general anaesthesia techniques, whereas inhalation anaesthesia yielded the highest CO 2 e emissions despite low-flow delivery. These findings highlight the mitigation potential of anaesthetic choice even in low-complexity procedures.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Assessing the carbon footprint of inhalation anaesthesia, total intravenous anaesthesia, and spinal anaesthesia for a single surgical procedure: a prospective observational study
Date Crossref
01/08/2026
Éditeur
Elsevier BV
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Sujets associés

Climate Change and Health ImpactsGlobal Health and SurgeryOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Recherche à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé ; OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant requis, aucune donnée externe enregistrée en base. Sources et limites.