ReviewCureus2026
The Green Cath Lab Challenge: Environmental Sustainability in Interventional Cardiology.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Healthcare systems are responsible for a significant share of global greenhouse gas emissions, and cardiac catheterization laboratories (CCLs) are among the most resource-intensive hospital units due to their reliance on single-use materials, high-energy imaging systems, and strict infection-control protocols. Understanding and mitigating their environmental impact is essential for achieving sustainable cardiovascular care. The aim of this review was to summarize and analyze available quantitative evidence on waste generation, recycling potential, and carbon emissions in interventional cardiology, and to identify practical strategies for transitioning toward a "green cath lab." A structured literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for the period 2015-2025, supplemented by Google Scholar and the cardiovascular society websites. Studies were eligible if they provided quantitative data on waste output, recycling rates, or carbon footprint in CCLs. Out of 357 retrieved records, only four met all inclusion criteria. Diagnostic coronary angiography produced an average carbon footprint of 12.5 kg CO₂-equivalent per case, with single-use disposables (40%) and imaging energy (25%) as the largest contributors. Waste audits showed 1.5-3 kg of waste per procedure, 36%-40% of which was recyclable. Optimizing procedural packs, improving heating, ventilation, and air conditioning or HVAC efficiency, and structured waste segregation achieved 20%-30% reductions in waste and emissions without affecting safety. Evidence indicates that interventional cardiology generates measurable and avoidable environmental burdens. Implementing targeted, low-cost interventions can markedly reduce both waste and carbon footprint. These findings establish a quantitative foundation for sustainability frameworks, carbon auditing, and policy initiatives toward a net-zero cath lab.
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.