単一手術における吸入麻酔、全静脈麻酔、脊椎麻酔の炭素足跡の評価：前向き観察研究
Assessing the carbon footprint of inhalation anaesthesia, total intravenous anaesthesia, and spinal anaesthesia for a single surgical procedure: a prospective observational study (原題)
Lina Lechani, Franck Verdonk, Daisy Daigné, Mathilde Mairé, Davuth Tan, Amélie Cambriel, Natacha Kapandji, Emmanuel Pardo, Clémentine Taconet
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
フランスの大学病院で子宮鏡手術を受ける患者を対象に、吸入麻酔、TIVA、脊椎麻酔の炭素足跡を前向きに比較した。脊椎麻酔が最も低く、TIVAが全身麻酔では最も低炭素で、吸入麻酔は低流量でも最も高排出だった。麻酔法の選択が医療の脱炭素に寄与する可能性を示した。
English
A prospective study in a French university hospital compared carbon footprints of inhalation anesthesia, TIVA, and spinal anesthesia for operative hysteroscopy. Spinal anesthesia had the lowest emissions, TIVA was the lowest-carbon general anesthesia, and inhalation anesthesia had the highest despite low-flow delivery. Anesthetic choice offers mitigation potential even in low-complexity procedures.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本の医療分野でも脱炭素への関心が高まっており、SSBJ開示やサステナビリティ報告で医療機関の排出量算定が求められる可能性がある。本研究成果は、麻酔法選択という具体的な削減策を提示し、日本の医療現場での適用可能性を示唆する。
In the global GX context
Globally, healthcare contributes ~5% of GHG emissions, and this study provides European evidence on anesthetic choices' carbon impact. It supports clinical decarbonization strategies and can inform hospital sustainability reporting aligned with TCFD/ISSB frameworks.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides comparative LCA data for anesthetic techniques, useful for healthcare carbon footprint research.
🏢実務担当者:Hospitals can use these findings to adopt lower-carbon anesthetic protocols and reduce emissions.
🏛政策担当者:Informs healthcare decarbonization policies and procurement guidelines for anesthetic agents and devices.
📄 Abstract（原文）
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.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2026.06.051first seen 2026-08-22 05:04:58
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。