ReviewGastro hep advances2025
Ripple Effect: Safety, Cost, and Environmental Concerns of Using Sterile Water in Endoscopy.
Review in Gastro hep advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sustainability indicators for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a framework proposed by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Greening Gastroenterology: Strategies to Reduce the Carbon Footprint in Clinical Practice.Cureus · 2026Review
- Nursing leadership for sustainable endoscopy: a narrative review and practice framework.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Green Endoscopy: Can Filtered Water Use in Endoscopy Be a Safe, Economical Alternative Which Promotes Sustainable Healthcare?ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
- Sustainability in endoscopy: switching from sterile water to tap water.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The gastroenterology societies are committed to reducing the carbon footprint of endoscopies and hence, re-examining waste-generating practices. One such practice is the recommendation to use sterile water during endoscopy for endoscopy lens cleaning and colon irrigation. We critically reviewed all published medical literature and guidelines on the safety of the type of water used in endoscopy. We calculated the cradle-to-grave carbon footprint of a 1-L sterile water bottle and compared it to published studies on bottled drinking water. Guidelines recommending sterile water during endoscopy are based on limited evidence and mostly expert opinions. Referenced studies utilize care protocols that are not practiced. There is also considerable cross-referencing of review articles and guidelines. Two clinical studies directly comparing tap and sterile water in gastrointestinal endoscopy found tap water to be a safe and practical cost-saving alternative to sterile water. The calculated carbon footprint of bottled sterile water is 575 g CO
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.