ArticleBMJ open2026
Environmental impact of NanoNeedle arthroscopy versus conventional knee arthroscopy: a hybrid carbon footprint analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from procedure room NanoNeedle arthroscopy (NA) and its associated clinical pathway, compared with conventional arthroscopy (CA) delivered in an operating room, focusing on non-complex knee arthroscopy procedures.
designHybrid carbon footprint analysis using process-based life-cycle methods combined with economy-wide input-output data that include environmental impact factors for medical devices and components of patient care pathways. Three care pathways were evaluated: (1) CA in an OR with preoperative MRI, (2) NA in a procedure room with MRI and (3) NA in a procedure room without MRI. Emissions were calculated for all pathway components, including patient and staff travel, diagnostic imaging, medical devices, the procedure itself and postoperative care.
settingUK National Health Service-based care pathway model for non-complex knee arthroscopy procedures. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was GHG emissions (kgCO
resultsThe CA pathway generated 77.0 kgCO
conclusionKnee arthroscopy delivered via the NA procedure room pathway has the potential to substantially reduce environmental impact compared with conventional OR-based care. As healthcare providers and policymakers increasingly consider environmental sustainability, technologies that enable alternative care models, such as NA in a procedure room setting, may represent a promising approach for reducing the carbon footprint of selected procedures.
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.