Carbon footprint of diagnostic versus therapeutic upper GI endoscopy
THE DIFFERENCE IN CARBON FOOTPRINT BETWEEN DIAGNOSTIC UPPER GI ENDOSCOPY IN DYSPEPTIC PATIENTS VERSUS THERAPEUTIC UPPER GI BLEEDING
This project will measure how much carbon is produced by diagnostic endoscopy for dyspepsia compared with therapeutic endoscopy for non-variceal upper GI bleeding.
Quick facts
| Study type | Observational |
|---|---|
| Enrollment | 75 (estimated) |
| Ages | 20 Years to 80 Years |
| Sex | All |
| Sponsor | King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital Academic / other |
| Locations | 2 sites (Bangkok and 1 other locations) |
| Trial ID | NCT07261228 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
What this trial studies
This is an observational study measuring the direct carbon footprint generated during upper GI endoscopy performed for dyspepsia (diagnostic) and for non-variceal upper GI bleeding (therapeutic) at two hospitals in Thailand. Investigators will record procedure duration, energy use, and disposable equipment consumption to calculate life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the procedures themselves. Patients aged 20–80 with BMI ≤30 who undergo specified diagnostic or therapeutic endoscopic interventions are enrolled and excluded if they have major coagulopathy, pregnancy, or receive inhalation anesthesia. The study tests the hypothesis that therapeutic endoscopy produces higher carbon emissions due to longer procedures and increased use of disposables and energy.
Who should consider this trial
Good fit: Ideal candidates are adults 20–80 years old with dyspepsia or non-variceal upper GI bleeding, BMI ≤30, and who will receive the specified diagnostic or therapeutic endoscopic procedures.
Not a fit: Patients who are pregnant, have severe coagulopathy, receive inhalation anesthesia, or require different endoscopic interventions are unlikely to benefit from this specific comparison.
Why it matters
Potential benefit: If successful, the results could help hospitals reduce the environmental impact of endoscopy by identifying higher-emission practices and guiding greener protocols.
How similar studies have performed: Prior work has estimated overall endoscopy carbon footprints including indirect sources like patient travel, but no prior studies have directly compared the direct emissions of diagnostic versus therapeutic upper GI endoscopy, so this comparison is relatively novel.
Eligibility criteria
Show full inclusion / exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria: * Patients with dyspepsia or non-variceal upper GI bleeding * Age 20-80 years * Body mass index of 30 or less; * Receiving one of the following procedure during upper GI endoscopy: For diagnostic endoscopy: Rapid urease test for H. pylori infection For therapeutic endoscopy: stop bleeding with either Argon plasma coagulation or Bipolar hemostasis probe or Hemostasis clip Exclusion Criteria: * Platelet \< 50,000 * INR \> 2.5 * Pregnancy * History of allergy to IV sedative medication * Peptic ulcer grade IIc and III according to Forrest classification * Patient receiving inhalation anesthesia
Where this trial is running
Bangkok and 1 other locations
- King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital — Bangkok, Thailand (Recruiting)
- Sawanpracharak Hospital — Nakhon Sawan, Thailand (Recruiting)
Study contacts
- Study coordinator: Ponthakorn Pichayanont, Doctor of Medicine
- Email: ponthakorn.pi@gmail.com
- Phone: 66831237704
How to participate
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Visit the official trial page on ClinicalTrials.gov for the most current contact information and recruitment status.
- Contact the listed study coordinator or principal investigator to request pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.