[一次性内窥镜的关键评估]。

IF 0.4 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Etienne Xavier Keller, Pascal Oechslin
{"title":"[一次性内窥镜的关键评估]。","authors":"Etienne Xavier Keller, Pascal Oechslin","doi":"10.1007/s00120-025-02694-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Single-use endoscopes have become widely established in urology. They are advocated due to the rapid integration of technological advances, the possibility of bypassing reprocessing requirements, and their potential to address gaps in availability. At the same time, their ecological impact in the context of sustainability is receiving increasing attention.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This article critically compares the advantages and disadvantages of single-use endoscopes versus reusable systems, with a particular focus on sustainability and resource consumption.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Discussion of fundamental studies and expert recommendations, supplemented by comparisons with data from nonmedical sources on energy and material use as well as waste management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Production, packaging, and distribution of single-use endoscopes require considerable resources, since not only plastic elements but also electronic components, image sensors, and sterilization processes are involved. In contrast, reusable systems entail significantly higher consumption of water and chemicals during reprocessing. Evidence from other industries highlights the importance of closed-loop systems and recycling strategies, which are still scarcely implemented for single-use endoscopes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Current data suggest that single-use endoscopes may have a worse impact on the environment compared to reusable endoscopes. However, current data do not yet allow for definitive conclusions. Further analyses are required to comprehensively assess resource and energy demands. Introduction of recycling strategies and reuse of particularly resource-intensive components represent promising approaches towards a more sustainable application of single-use endoscopes.</p>","PeriodicalId":29782,"journal":{"name":"Urologie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Critical assessment of single-use endoscopes].\",\"authors\":\"Etienne Xavier Keller, Pascal Oechslin\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00120-025-02694-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Single-use endoscopes have become widely established in urology. They are advocated due to the rapid integration of technological advances, the possibility of bypassing reprocessing requirements, and their potential to address gaps in availability. At the same time, their ecological impact in the context of sustainability is receiving increasing attention.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This article critically compares the advantages and disadvantages of single-use endoscopes versus reusable systems, with a particular focus on sustainability and resource consumption.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Discussion of fundamental studies and expert recommendations, supplemented by comparisons with data from nonmedical sources on energy and material use as well as waste management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Production, packaging, and distribution of single-use endoscopes require considerable resources, since not only plastic elements but also electronic components, image sensors, and sterilization processes are involved. In contrast, reusable systems entail significantly higher consumption of water and chemicals during reprocessing. Evidence from other industries highlights the importance of closed-loop systems and recycling strategies, which are still scarcely implemented for single-use endoscopes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Current data suggest that single-use endoscopes may have a worse impact on the environment compared to reusable endoscopes. However, current data do not yet allow for definitive conclusions. Further analyses are required to comprehensively assess resource and energy demands. Introduction of recycling strategies and reuse of particularly resource-intensive components represent promising approaches towards a more sustainable application of single-use endoscopes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urologie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-025-02694-3\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-025-02694-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:一次性内窥镜在泌尿外科已经广泛应用。由于技术进步的迅速整合,绕过后处理要求的可能性,以及它们解决可用性差距的潜力,它们受到提倡。与此同时,它们在可持续性方面的生态影响正受到越来越多的关注。目的:本文批判性地比较了一次性内窥镜与可重复使用系统的优缺点,特别关注可持续性和资源消耗。材料和方法:讨论基础研究和专家建议,并与有关能源和材料使用以及废物管理的非医疗来源的数据进行比较。结果:一次性内窥镜的生产、包装和分销需要大量的资源,因为不仅涉及塑料元件,还涉及电子元件、图像传感器和灭菌过程。相比之下,可重复使用的系统在后处理过程中需要消耗更多的水和化学品。来自其他行业的证据强调了闭环系统和回收策略的重要性,这对于一次性内窥镜来说仍然很少实施。结论:目前的数据表明,与可重复使用的内窥镜相比,一次性使用的内窥镜对环境的影响可能更大。然而,目前的数据还不能得出明确的结论。需要进一步分析以全面评估资源和能源需求。引入回收策略和资源密集型组件的再利用是实现一次性内窥镜更可持续应用的有希望的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Critical assessment of single-use endoscopes].

Background: Single-use endoscopes have become widely established in urology. They are advocated due to the rapid integration of technological advances, the possibility of bypassing reprocessing requirements, and their potential to address gaps in availability. At the same time, their ecological impact in the context of sustainability is receiving increasing attention.

Objective: This article critically compares the advantages and disadvantages of single-use endoscopes versus reusable systems, with a particular focus on sustainability and resource consumption.

Materials and methods: Discussion of fundamental studies and expert recommendations, supplemented by comparisons with data from nonmedical sources on energy and material use as well as waste management.

Results: Production, packaging, and distribution of single-use endoscopes require considerable resources, since not only plastic elements but also electronic components, image sensors, and sterilization processes are involved. In contrast, reusable systems entail significantly higher consumption of water and chemicals during reprocessing. Evidence from other industries highlights the importance of closed-loop systems and recycling strategies, which are still scarcely implemented for single-use endoscopes.

Conclusion: Current data suggest that single-use endoscopes may have a worse impact on the environment compared to reusable endoscopes. However, current data do not yet allow for definitive conclusions. Further analyses are required to comprehensively assess resource and energy demands. Introduction of recycling strategies and reuse of particularly resource-intensive components represent promising approaches towards a more sustainable application of single-use endoscopes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Urologie
Urologie UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信