ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Built-in waste: a narrative analysis of the hidden environmental impact of battery-containing surgical devices.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEfforts to align surgical practice with environmental sustainability has highlighted the need to address overlooked sources of waste in surgical practice. Single-use surgical devices containing embedded batteries are widely used across specialties and are frequently discarded in clinical waste streams without separation or recycling. The environmental and regulatory implications of this practice remain poorly characterized.
methodsWe conducted a structured exploratory mapping of battery-containing single-use surgical devices currently in clinical use across multiple surgical specialties. Devices were identified through a combination of clinical expertise, targeted web-based searches, and review of publicly available manufacturer documentation, including instructions for use (IFU), product catalogues, and technical data sheets. For each device, battery chemistry, integration type, removability, and availability of manufacturer-provided disposal instructions were recorded based solely on publicly accessible documentation.
resultsA total of 23 battery-containing single-use surgical devices were identified across 9 technological categories. Battery chemistry was specified in publicly accessible documentation for 13 devices (alkaline, n = 7; lithium-based primary cells, n = 3; silver oxide, n = 3). Explicit manufacturer-provided disposal instructions were available for 9 devices (39%), partial guidance for 9 (39%), and no guidance was identified for 5 (22%). A marked disparity was observed between integration types: devices with user-removable batteries provided explicit disposal guidance in 88% of cases (7/8), whereas no sealed single-use device provided explicit guidance (0/11). In 3 of 23 devices, no publicly accessible regulatory documentation was retrievable. Regulatory analysis revealed a structural tension between mandatory separate battery collection under EU regulation 2023/1542 and the infectious waste exemption that permits routine incineration of contaminated surgical devices, resulting in systematic loss of recoverable battery materials.
conclusionsBattery-containing surgical disposables represent a regulatory and environmental blind spot at the intersection of infection control and circular economy policy. Clearer reporting standards, improved device design, and stronger manufacturer accountability are required to reconcile patient safety with sustainable resource management. Professional societies, regulators, and procurement bodies should prioritize transparent battery disclosure and explicit end-of-life guidance as part of sustainability frameworks for surgical care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42864465What 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.