ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2023
Neptune versus canister-based surgical waste management in Europe: results of the GREEN study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The rise of green orthopaedics: a bibliometric mapping and thematic evaluation of the global research landscape.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Surgical Oncologists for Sustainability: A Statement from the SSO Surgical Oncologists for Sustainability Committee.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- A life cycle assessment of disposing intra-operative collected fluids, a comparative study between the Neptune 3 versus canister drainage.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Intramuscular methylergonovine to decrease blood loss during cesarean delivery for twins: A triple-blinded placebo-controlled randomized trial.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Review of robotic surgery platforms and end effectors.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ineffective surgical fluid waste management in operating rooms (OR) creates a significant environmental burden, reduces OR efficiency, and adds physical challenges for surgical staff. There is a need for waste management systems that improve OR efficiency, safety, and sustainability. The GREEN study (Greening operating Rooms in EuropE comparing Neptune vs. canisters) was conducted to compare the impact of two fluid waste management systems. Materials and methods: This 2-arm, nonrandomized, prospective service evaluation of fluid waste extraction was conducted using observational time series and surveys. Fluid waste-related data were collected from routine urologic and orthopedic surgeries across three European hospital sites. The primary endpoint of waste disposal impact was the volume of treated waste after surgery (kilograms) using Stryker's Neptune device ( Results: The total weight of device-related treated waste products was reduced by 98.5% when using Neptune (0.2±0.7 kg) compared with traditional canisters (13.2±16.6 kg; Conclusion: Stryker's Neptune waste management system significantly reduces the volume of treated waste per surgery and improves OR efficiency, staff safety, and user satisfaction over the traditional canister system. This is a more eco-responsible approach to OR fluid waste management and could be considered in any healthcare establishment that generates fluid waste.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.