ObjectiveEndoscopy is healthcare’s third largest generator of medical waste in hospitals. This prospective study aimed to measure a single unit’s waste carbon footprint and perform a pioneer intervention towards a more sustainable endoscopy practice. The relation of regulated medical waste (RMW; material fully contaminated with blood or body fluids or containing infectious agents) versus landfill waste (non-recyclable material not fully contaminated) may play a critical role.DesignIn a four-stage prospective study, following a 4-week observational audit with daily weighing of both waste types (stage 1), stage 2 consisted of a 1-week intervention with team education of waste handling. Recycling bins were placed in endoscopy rooms, landfill and RMW bins were relocated. During stages 3 (1 month after intervention) and 4 (4 months after intervention), daily endoscopic waste was weighed. Equivalence of 1 kg of landfill waste to 1 kg carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) and 1 kg of RMW to 3kgCO2e was assumed. Paired samples t-tests for comparisons.ResultsFrom stage 1 to stage 3, mean total waste and RMW were reduced by 12.9% (p=0.155) and 41.4% (p=0.010), respectively, whereas landfill (p=0.059) and recycling waste increased (paper: p=0.001; plastic: p=0.007). While mean endoscopy load was similar (46.2 vs 44.5, p=0.275), a total decrease of CO2e by 31.6% (138.8kgCO2e) was found (mean kgCO2e109.7 vs 74.9, p=0.018). The annual reduction was calculated at 1665.6kgCO2e. All these effects were sustained 4 months after the intervention (stage 4) without objections by responsible endoscopy personnel.ConclusionIn this interventional study, applying sustainability measures to a real-world scenario, RMW reduction and daily recycling were achieved and sustained over time, without compromising endoscopy productivity.

Introduction: Evidence supporting transmural remission (TR) as a long-term treatment target in Crohn's disease (CD) is still unavailable. Less stringent but more reachable targets such as isolated endoscopic (IER) or radiologic remission (IRR) may also be acceptable options in the long-term. Methods: Multicenter retrospective study including 404 CD patients evaluated by magnetic resonance enterography and colonoscopy. Five-year rates of hospitalization, surgery, use of steroids, and treatment escalation were compared between patients with TR, IER, IRR, and no remission (NR). Results: 20.8% of CD patients presented TR, 23.3% IER, 13.6% IRR and 42.3% NR. TR was associated with lower risk of hospitalization (odds-ratio [OR] 0.244 [0.111-0.538], p < 0.001), surgery (OR 0.132 [0.030-0.585], p = 0.008), steroid use (OR 0.283 [0.159-0.505], p < 0.001), and treatment escalation (OR 0.088 [0.044-0.176],This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

No abstract