ArticlePediatric radiology2026
Reduction of iodinated contrast waste, cost, and greenhouse gas emissions using imaging bulk packaging in a pediatric hospital.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The invisible footprint: why planetary health is a pediatric radiologist's obligation.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are environmental and financial benefits to reducing iodinated contrast media (ICM) waste. While Imaging Bulk Package (IBP) bottles have been demonstrated to reduce contrast waste in adult hospitals, lower computed tomography (CT) volumes and smaller contrast doses pose challenges for utilizing IBP in children's hospitals.
objectivePrimary outcome: quantification of CT contrast waste during a 6-month period at a single children's hospital. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: quantification of single-use product waste and greenhouse gas emissions, identification of the 12-h periods of highest contrast use, and estimation of reductions in contrast waste, single-use product use, costs, and greenhouse gas emissions by using IBP ICM during peak hours. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll contrast-enhanced CT performed from January through June 2025 were reviewed. Volume of contrast wasted was calculated. The 12-h time period with the highest contrast-enhanced CT volume was determined. Reductions in contrast waste, single-use products, cost, and greenhouse gas emissions by using IBP ICM during these peak hours were estimated.
resultsApproximately 291 contrast-enhanced CT exams were performed per month. Mean contrast waste was 37 mL per study, totaling 66 L of wasted contrast over 6 months. Peak hours were 9 AM to 9 PM on weekdays. The mean ICM waste per exam was 37 mL using single-dose bottles versus 17 mL using IBP bottles during peak hours (P<0.001). Using IBP ICM during peak hours and single-use ICM at other times could reduce contrast waste by 56%, glass bottle waste by 33%, and save $40,740 per year. Using IBP during peak hours with a syringeless contrast injector would decrease greenhouse gas emissions by 72% due to added benefits of decreased waste of single-use plastics.
conclusionImplementing IBP ICM during peak hours would substantially reduce contrast waste, single-use product waste, and costs at our hospital. Other children's hospitals may evaluate their contrast utilization practices, including quantification of contrast waste and single-use products, to identify opportunities to reduce waste through use of IBP and syringeless contrast injectors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42149152What 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.