Advertisement

Environmentally sustainable brachytherapy care

      Climate change is the greatest global health threat of the 21st century (
      • Romanello M
      • McGushin A
      • Napoli CD
      • et al.
      The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: Code red for a healthy future.
      ). Its impact on human health is well-documented and is expected to further increase if mitigation efforts remain inadequate. Rising temperatures directly exacerbate the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, air pollution, floods and droughts, and the spread of vectorborne diseases. Such events magnify health disparities, as these effects have a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable populations who are also the least equipped to deal with these disastrous climate effects. These populations include the elderly, children, those with low income, ethnic minorities, and patients with comorbidities, including those with cancer (
      • Atwoli L
      • Baqui AH
      • Benfield T
      • et al.
      Call for emergency action to limit global temperature increases, restore biodiversity, and protect health.
      ).
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Brachytherapy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Romanello M
        • McGushin A
        • Napoli CD
        • et al.
        The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: Code red for a healthy future.
        Lancet. 2021; 398: 1619-1662https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01787-6
        • Atwoli L
        • Baqui AH
        • Benfield T
        • et al.
        Call for emergency action to limit global temperature increases, restore biodiversity, and protect health.
        New Engl J Med. 2021; 385 (null)https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe2113200
        • Hiatt RA
        • Beyeler N.
        Cancer and climate change.
        Lancet Oncol. 2020; 21: e519-e527https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30448-4
        • Schiller JH
        • Averbuch SD
        • Berg CD.
        Why oncologists should care about climate change.
        JCO Oncol Pract. 2020; 16: 775-778https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.20.00609
        • Ortiz AP
        • Calo WA
        • Mendez-Lazaro P
        • et al.
        Strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity to disasters in cancer control plans: Lessons learned from Puerto Rico.
        Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2020; 29: 1290-1293https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-1067
        • Hantel A
        • Abel GA.
        An action plan for environmentally sustainable cancer care.
        JAMA Oncol. 2020; 6: 469-470https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.5364
        • Nogueira LM
        • Yabroff KR
        • Bernstein A.
        Climate change and cancer.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2020; 70: 239-244https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21610
        • Nogueira LM
        • Sahar L
        • Efstathiou JA
        • et al.
        Association between declared hurricane disasters and survival of patients with lung cancer undergoing radiation treatment.
        JAMA. 2019; 322: 269-271https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.7657
        • David-West G
        • Musa F
        • Frey MK
        • et al.
        Cross-sectional study of the impact of a natural disaster on the delivery of gynecologic oncology care.
        Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2015; 9: 605-608https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2015.83
        • Baskar R
        • Lee KA
        • Yeo R
        • Yeoh KW.
        Cancer and radiation therapy: Current advances and future directions.
        Int J Med Sci. 2012; 9: 193-199https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.3635
        • Delaney G
        • Jacob S
        • Featherstone C
        • Barton M.
        The role of radiotherapy in cancer treatment: estimating optimal utilization from a review of evidence-based clinical guidelines.
        Cancer. 2005; 104: 1129-1137https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21324
        • Eckelman MJ
        • Huang K
        • Lagasse R
        • et al.
        Health care pollution and public health damage in the United States: An update.
        Health Affairs. 2020; 39: 2071-2079https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.01247
        • Schoen J
        • McGinty GB
        • Quirk C.
        Radiology in our changing climate: A call to action.
        J Am Coll Radiol. 2021; 18: 1041-1043https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2021.02.009
      1. Collins A, Dilger A, Tummala N. Climate change, health and surgery: A call to action.https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/Opinion/Article/10-21/Climate-Change/64942?ses=ogst?ses=ogst. Accessed December 25, 2021.

        • Hsu S
        • Thiel C
        • Mello MJ
        • Slutzman JE.
        Dumpster diving in the emergency department: Quantity and characteristics of waste at a level i trauma center.
        Western J Emerg Med: Integrating Emerg Care Popul Health. 2020; 21https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.6.47900
        • Thiel CL
        • Woods NC
        • Bilec MM.
        Strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from laparoscopic surgery.
        Am J Public Health. 2018; 108: S158-S164https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304397
      2. Environmental Impacts of Surgical Procedures: Life cycle assessment of hysterectomy in the United States | Environmental Science & Technology. Accessed September 14, 2021. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es504719g.

        • Gordon IO
        • Sherman JD
        • Leapman M
        • et al.
        Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of gastrointestinal biopsies in a surgical pathology laboratory.
        Am J Clin Pathol. 2021; 156: 540-549https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqab021
        • Vu CC
        • Jawad MS
        • Krauss DJ.
        The cost-effectiveness and value proposition of brachytherapy.
        Semin Radiat Oncol. 2020; 30: 87-93https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semradonc.2019.08.007
        • Morris WJ
        • Tyldesley S
        • Rodda S
        • et al.
        Androgen suppression combined with elective nodal and dose escalated radiation therapy (the ASCENDE-RT Trial): An analysis of survival endpoints for a randomized trial comparing a low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost to a dose-escalated external beam boost for high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
        Int J Radiat Oncol*Biol*Phys. 2017; 98: 275-285https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.11.026
        • Rodrigues G
        • Yao X
        • Loblaw DA
        • et al.
        Low-dose rate brachytherapy for patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer: A systematic review.
        Can Urol Assoc J. 2013; 7: 463-470https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1482
        • Nout R
        • Smit V
        • Putter H
        • et al.
        Vaginal brachytherapy versus pelvic external beam radiotherapy for patients with endometrial cancer of high-intermediate risk (PORTEC-2): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial.
        Lancet. 2010; 375: 816-823https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)62163-2
        • Creutzberg CL
        • van Putten WL
        • Koper PC
        • et al.
        Surgery and postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone for patients with stage-1 endometrial carcinoma: multicentre randomised trial.
        Lancet. 2000; 355: 1404-1411https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02139-5
        • Tanderup K
        • Eifel PJ
        • Yashar CM
        • et al.
        Curative radiation therapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: Brachytherapy is NOT optional.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014; 88: 537-539https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.11.011
        • Ott OJ
        • Strnad V
        • Hildebrandt G
        • et al.
        GEC-ESTRO multicenter phase 3-trial: Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus external beam whole breast irradiation: Early toxicity and patient compliance.
        Radiother Oncol. 2016; 120: 119-123https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2016.06.019
        • Coles CE
        • Griffin CL
        • Kirby AM
        • et al.
        Partial-breast radiotherapy after breast conservation surgery for patients with early breast cancer (UK IMPORT LOW trial): 5-year results from a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.
        Lancet. 2017; 390: 1048-1060https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31145-5
        • Vicini FA
        • Cecchini RS
        • White JR
        • et al.
        Long-term primary results of accelerated partial breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for early-stage breast cancer: a randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial.
        Lancet. 2019; 394: 2155-2164https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32514-0
      3. MacNeill AJ, Lillywhite R, Brown CJ. The impact of surgery on global climate: a carbon footprinting study of operating theatres in three health systems. Lancet Planet Health. 2017;1:e381–e388. doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30162-6

        • Drew J
        • Christie SD
        • Tyedmers P
        • et al.
        Operating in a climate crisis: A state-of-the-science review of life cycle assessment within surgical and anesthetic care.
        Environ Health Perspect. 2020; 129076001https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP8666
        • Babu MA
        • Dalenberg AK
        • Goodsell G
        • et al.
        Greening the operating room: Results of a scalable initiative to reduce waste and recover supply costs.
        Neurosurgery. 2019; 85: 432-437https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy275
        • Gordon D.
        Sustainability in the operating room.
        Anesthesiol Clin. 2020; 38: 679-692https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anclin.2020.06.006
        • Chua ALB
        • Amin R
        • Zhang J
        • et al.
        The environmental impact of interventional radiology: An evaluation of greenhouse gas emissions from an academic interventional radiology practice.
        J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2021; 32 (e3): 907-915https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2021.03.531
        • MacNeill AJ
        • Lillywhite R
        • Brown CJ.
        The impact of surgery on global climate: A carbon footprinting study of operating theatres in three health systems.
        Lancet Planet Health. 2017; 1: e381-e388https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30162-6
        • Pang Z
        • Chen Y
        • Zhang J
        • et al.
        How much HVAC energy could be saved from the occupant-centric smart home thermostat: A nationwide simulation study.
        Appl Energy. 2021; 283116251https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116251
        • Zygourakis CC
        • Yoon S
        • Valencia V
        • et al.
        Operating room waste: disposable supply utilization in neurosurgical procedures.
        J Neurosurg. 2017; 126: 620-625https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.2.JNS152442
        • Stockert EW
        • Langerman A.
        Assessing the magnitude and costs of intraoperative inefficiencies attributable to surgical instrument trays.
        J Am Coll Surg. 2014; 219: 646-655https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.06.019
        • Thiel CL
        • Eckelman M
        • Guido R
        • et al.
        Environmental impacts of surgical procedures: life cycle assessment of hysterectomy in the United States.
        Environ Sci Technol. 2015; 49: 1779-1786https://doi.org/10.1021/es504719g
        • Thiel C
        • Horwitz LI.
        Improving value in health care through comprehensive supply optimization.
        JAMA. 2019; 322: 1451-1452https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.15478
        • Tieszen ME
        • Gruenberg JC.
        A quantitative, qualitative, and critical assessment of surgical waste. Surgeons venture through the trash can.
        JAMA. 1992; 267: 2765-2768
        • Van der Werff E
        • Steg L
        • Keizer K.I
        am what I am, by looking past the present: The influence of biospheric values and past behavior on environmental self-identity.
        Environ Behav. 2014; 46: 626-657https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512475209
        • Sherman JD
        • Raibley LAI
        • Eckelman MJ.
        Life cycle assessment and costing methods for device procurement: Comparing reusable and single-use disposable laryngoscopes.
        Anesth Analges. 2018; 127: 434-443https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002683
        • Health C for D and R
        Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002 (MDUFMA), P.L. 107-250.
        FDA. 2019; (Published online February 8Accessed September 30, 2021)
        • Asfaw S
        • Dilger A
        • Tummala N
        • Yates E.
        The intersection of climate change and surgery.
        Bulletin. 2021; (Published online September 2Accessed December 25, 2021)
      4. Jenkins N. How to reduce waste by increasing use of reusable medical textiles. Supply Chain Strategies & Solutions. Volume 6, Issue 2, 3. http://www.sustainabilityroadmap.org/pims/pdfs/pim247_How_to_Reduce_Waste_NJenkins.pdf.

      5. Climate and Health. Health Care Without Harm. Published April 28, 2013. Accessed November 21, 2021. https://noharm-uscanada.org/climateandhealth.

        • Ryan SM
        • Nielsen CJ.
        Global warming potential of inhaled anesthetics: Application to clinical use.
        Anesth Analges. 2010; 111: 92-98https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181e058d7
        • Travel |
        TARGIT-IORT | breast cancer.
        Breast Cancer IORT. 2021; (Accessed September 7)
        • Vaidya JS
        • Vaidya UJ
        • Baum M
        • et al.
        Global adoption of single-shot targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) to improve breast cancer treatment – better for patients, better for health care systems.
        UCL Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, London, UK2021 (Published February 5, 2021. Accessed December 25, 2021)
        • Vaidya A
        • Vaidya P
        • Both B
        • et al.
        Health economics of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis in the United Kingdom.
        BMJ Open. 2017; 7e014944https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014944
        • Williamson JF.
        Brachytherapy technology and physics practice since 1950: A half-century of progress.
        Phys Med Biol. 2006; 51: R303-R325https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/51/13/R18
        • Strohmaier S
        • Zwierzchowski G.
        Comparison of (60)Co and (192)Ir sources in HDR brachytherapy.
        J Contemp Brachyther. 2011; 3: 199-208https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2011.26471
        • Strohmaier S
        • Zwierzchowski G.
        Comparison of (60)Co and (192)Ir sources in HDR brachytherapy.
        J Contemp Brachyther. 2011; 3: 199-208https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2011.26471
        • Mailhot Vega RB
        • Barbee D
        • Talcott W
        • et al.
        Cost in perspective: direct assessment of American market acceptability of Co-60 in gynecologic high-dose-rate brachytherapy and contrast with experience abroad.
        J Contemp Brachyther. 2018; 10: 503-509https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2018.79928
      6. 14:00-17:00. ISO 14044:2006. ISO. Accessed December 25, 2021. https://www.iso.org/cms/render/live/en/sites/isoorg/contents/data/standard/03/84/38498.html.