The carbon footprint of ambulatory gastrointestinal endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy is considered the third highest generator of waste within healthcare. This is of public importance as approximately 18 million endoscopy procedures are performed yearly in the USA and 2 million in France. However, a precise measure of the carbon footprint of gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE) is lacking. METHODS: This retrospective study for 2021 was conducted in an ambulatory GIE center in France where 8524 procedures were performed on 6070 patients. The annual carbon footprint of GIE was calculated using "Bilan Carbone" of the French Environment and Energy Management Agency. This multi-criteria method accounts for direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from energy consumption (gas and electricity), medical gases, medical and non-medical equipment, consumables, freight, travel, and waste. RESULTS: GHG emissions in 2021 were estimated to be 241.4 tonnes CO2 equivalent (CO2e) at the center, giving a carbon footprint for one GIE procedure of 28.4 kg CO2e. The main GHG emission, 45 % of total emissions, was from travel by patients and center staff to and from the center. Other emission sources, in rank order, were medical and non-medical equipment (32 %), energy consumption (12 %), consumables (7 %), waste (3 %), freight (0.4 %), and medical gases (0.005 %). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multi-criteria analysis assessing the carbon footprint of GIE. It highlights that travel, medical equipment, and energy are major sources of impact, with waste being a minor contributor. This study provides an opportunity to raise awareness among gastroenterologists of the carbon footprint of GIE procedures.

Compliance with the faecal calprotectin test in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: We investigated, for the first time, levels of compliance with faecal calprotectin test in inflammatory bowel disease patients. METHODS: All consecutive adult inflammatory bowel disease patients having been prescribed an faecal calprotectin test between December 2014-July 2015 were included. At their next visit to the hospital, patients had to return a stool sample for the faecal calprotectin test and answer a simple questionnaire: 'Have you brought a stool sample? If not, why not? If so, did you encounter any difficulties when collecting the sample? Were you aware of faecal calprotectin before being asked to take the test?'. RESULTS: One hundred and one patients were included (50 men; 77 patients with Crohn's disease). The range age was 40 years (19-68). Eighty-nine patients were being treated with infliximab, 10 were on vedolizumab, and two were not being treated with a biologic. Thirty-seven patients (35%) had performed the faecal calprotectin test. Eighty-one patients (80%) had not been aware of faecal calprotectin before being asked to take the test. Of the 64 patients who did not take the test, the prime reasons for non-compliance were forgetfulness (n = 49, 76.6%), a lack of perceived benefit for the test (n = 7, 11%), constipation (n = 5, 7.8%), refusal to handle faeces (n = 2, 3.1%), and difficulty collecting the stool sample (n = 1, 1.5%). CONCLUSION: Only one-third of the patients performed the faecal calprotectin test. The main reason for non-compliance was forgetfulness. Our present results emphasise the need for better patient education on the importance of complying with faecal calprotectin testing and the future of faecal calprotectin testing at home.

Value of cross-sectional imaging in assessing active Crohn's disease before stoma reversal.

BACKGROUND: There are currently no guidelines on the need to assess disease activity before stoma reversal in Crohn's disease (CD). We sought to determine the value of cross-sectional imaging for detecting active CD before stoma reversal. METHODS: 38 CD patients underwent cross-sectional imaging before stoma reversal. CD activity was blindly evaluated by an independent radiologist. Postoperative outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Before stoma reversal, cross-sectional imaging identified active CD in 20 of the 38 study participants (52.6%). In 9 out of 10 tested patients, radiologic and endoscopic assessments gave concordant findings with regard to CD recurrence before stoma reversal. Stoma reversal was delayed in half of the patients with active CD and in none of the patients without active CD. Before stoma reversal, tumor necrosis factor alpha antagonists or immunosuppressants were initiated in 45% of the patients with active CD and 5.6% of the patients without active CD. In the year following stoma reversal, the recurrence rate (in a radiologic assessment) was higher in patients with active CD than in patients without active CD (75.0% vs. 30.8%, respectively; p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Cross-sectional imaging revealed postoperative recurrence in about a quarter of patients before stoma reversal; this finding may influence the postoperative treatment strategy and outcomes.