Operating room waste management after open and laparoscopic hepatectomy. Is there any possibility of improving it?

Magdalena Maria Wąsik; Oleksii Potapov; Peter Sielski; Jarosław Kolendo; Stefania Marconi; Manuel Sanchez-Casalongue; Andrzej L. Komorowski

doi:10.48269/MandPH-AFMKU-25-1-002

Published: 2025-10-08

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025)

Operating room waste management after open and laparoscopic hepatectomy. Is there any possibility of improving it?

Magdalena Maria Wąsik

, Oleksii Potapov

, Peter Sielski

, Jarosław Kolendo

, Stefania Marconi

, Manuel Sanchez-Casalongue

, Andrzej L. Komorowski

Section: review articles

https://doi.org/10.48269/MandPH-AFMKU-25-1-002

Abstract

Background:
Operating rooms worldwide are one of the major sources of plastic waste. In this work we have speculated, that it is possible to limit the amount of waste produced during laparoscopic and open hepatectomies significantly, based on the analysis of single use items and the possibilities of replacing them with multiple use items. For this purpose, all waste produced during , straightforward laparoscopic and open liver resections were analyzed, then divided into two groups: obligatory and non-obligatory waste.

Material and methods:
During one open and one laparoscopic hepatectomy procedure, we have analyzed all waste produced as the result of the procedures. The waste was divided into two groups: obligatory and non-obligatory waste.

Results:
All items used for each operation was separated from the waste bins after operation inside the OR. The members of the research team (M.W. O.P. and A.L.K) discussed each item and qualified it to one of the two categories: obligatory waste or non-obligatory waste. After assigning all waste items into one of the two groups, the non-obligatory waste was packed and weighted (Figure 1). The total weight and number of waste bins used for non-obligatory waste was recorded. Non-obligatory waste after laparoscopic hepatectomy weighted 3800 grams and was packed into two waste bins while after open hepatectomy the non-obligatory waste weighted 1400 grams and was packed into one waste bin.

Conclusions:
Even a small reduction in cost of one procedure can translate globally into big savings for the hospitals and obviously for less environmental impact of the hospital waste.

Keywords:

environment , laparoscopic hepatectomy , medical waste , open hepatectomy , operating room waste

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

Wąsik, Magdalena Maria, et al. “Operating Room Waste Management After Open and Laparoscopic Hepatectomy. Is There Any Possibility of Improving It?”. Medicine and Public Health, vol. 3, no. 1, Oct. 2025, pp. 1–6, doi:10.48269/MandPH-AFMKU-25-1-002.

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

1. Kwakye G, Brat GA, Makary MA. Green surgical practices for health care. Arch Surg. 2011;146(2):131–136.
Google Scholar

2. Vaccari M, Tudor T, Perteghella A. Costs associated with the management of waste from healthcare facilities: An analysis at national and site level. Waste Manag Res. 2017;36(1):39–47.
Google Scholar

3. Albert MG, Rothkopf DM. Operating room waste reduction in plastic and hand surgery. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2015;23(4):235–238.
Google Scholar

4. Anstey MH, Trent L, Bhonagiri D, Hammond NE, Knowles S, McGain F; George Institute for Global Health and the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group; Steering Committee members; Coordinating centre List of investigators; Site List of investigators. How much do we throw away in the intensive care unit? An observational point prevalence study of Australian and New Zealand ICUs. Crit Care Resusc. 2023;25(2):78–83.
Google Scholar

5. Favero MS. Requiem for reuse of single-use devices in US hospitals. Infect Control Hospital Epidemiol. 2001;22(9):539–541.
Google Scholar

6. Goldfield NM, Malapati P, Chafitz T, Saravanapavan Y, Alamgir N, Gander J, Meyer MJ. Sterile surgical supply waste identification using
Google Scholar

asynchronous analysis: Pediatric surgery QI pilot. Surg Open Sci. 2023;15:32–37.
Google Scholar

7. Dimick JB, Cowan JA Jr, Knol JA, Upchurch GR Jr. Hepatic Resection in the United States: Indications, Outcomes, and Hospital Procedural
Google Scholar

Volumes From a Nationally Representative Database. Arch Surg. 2003;138(2):185–191, https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.138.2.185
Google Scholar

8. Olthof PB, Elfrink AKE, Marra E, Belt EJT, van den Boezem PB, Bosscha K, Consten ECJ, den Dulk M, Gobardhan PD, Hagendoorn J, van
Google Scholar

Heek TNT, IJzermans JNM, Klaase JM, Kuhlmann KFD, Leclercq WKG, Liem MSL, Manusama ER, Marsman HA, Mieog JSD, Oosterling
Google Scholar

SJ, Patijn GA, Te Riele W, Swijnenburg R-J, Torrenga H, van Duijvendijk P, Vermaas M, Kok NFM, Grünhagen DJ; Dutch Hepato
Google Scholar

Biliary Audit Group. Volume-outcome relationship of liver surgery: a nationwide analysis. Br J Surg. 2020;107(7):917–926.
Google Scholar

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025)
Published: 2025-10-08

eISSN: 2956-9443

Publisher

AFM Publishing House of the Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University

Licence CC

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Submit