You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Devices substitution can reduce environmental burden: what about strategies substitution?

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter
Devices substitution can reduce environmental burden: what about strategies substitution?
  1. Raphaëlle Grau1,
  2. Jérémie Jacques2,3,
  3. Jérôme Rivory1,
  4. Mathieu Pioche1
  1. 1Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France
  2. 2Gastroenterology, Hopital Dupuytren, Limoges, France
  3. 3UMR 7252, CNRS XLIM, Limoges, France
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mathieu Pioche; mathieu.pioche{at}chu-lyon.fr

https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2024-334092

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We read with great interest the article by Henniger et al1 about reducing scope 3 carbon emissions in endoscopy and would like to discuss several points.

    First, we commend the study’s transparency, as manufacturers provided detailed information about their fabrication and delivery processes. This collaboration exemplifies our shared goal of environmental protection. Furthermore, this is the first prospective study with an intervention aimed at reducing the endoscopy footprint, leading to significant positive impacts and encouraging further interventional ecological research.

    Educating staff to reduce scope 3 emissions by minimising the number of devices is a promising approach to fostering sustainability. However, the study’s overall device reduction of just 10% may not substantially lower our global footprint, as the emissions related to procedure devices represent only a fraction of the total environmental impact.

    In our recent study comparing two types of endoscopic resections,2 we measured …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors Conceived and designed the analysis: RG, MP. Collected the data for the LCA: MP, JJ, RG. Contributed data or analysis tools: JJ, JR. Performed the analysis: JJ, RG, MP. Drafted the paper: MP, RG, JR.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests Mathieu Pioche: consultant for Olympus, trainer for Olympus, Pentax, Norgine, Boston, Cook, Atract and Ipefix (coinvention). Jérôme Rivory: consultant for Olympus, trainer for Olympus, Boston, Cook, Ovesco. Jérémie Jacques: honorarium ERBE medical ESD training, Olympus ESD training, FUJIFILM ESD training, Pentax MEdical ESD training, Boston Scientific Therapeutic EUS training, MAYOLI SPINDLER Lecture about pancreatic disease, JANSSEN CILAG; consulting fee PENTAX MEDICAL Organization of European ESD training.

      Raphaëlle Grau has nothing to disclose.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.