Recent research highlights the significant environmental impact of various urinary drainage strategies used in clinical practice. Initially, researchers evaluated how healthcare resource use contributes to global warming. Furthermore, they conducted a comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of three common urological devices. Consequently, the study identified that both device choice and care delivery models act as primary drivers of carbon emissions in urology. Notably, indwelling catheterization consistently demonstrated the highest climate change impact among the methods tested.

How Urinary Drainage Strategies Influence Carbon Emissions

Specifically, the mean climate change impact over 30 days was 96.5 kg CO2-equivalents for indwelling catheterization. In contrast, disposable clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) catheters produced 39.8 kg CO2-eq, while temporary urethral stents showed the lowest footprint at 16.1 kg CO2-eq. Therefore, utilizing a stent instead of a standard catheter can reduce the climate impact by approximately 83%. Additionally, stents lowered fossil resource use by 83% and water consumption by 92%. Moreover, the frequency of device replacement substantially affects these totals. For example, reducing unnecessary replacements can significantly lower the environmental footprint. Similarly, patient autonomy plays a vital role in sustainability. Specifically, when patients manage their own care, emissions related to nurse travel decrease. Resultantly, the overall footprint of the care model improves. Ultimately, this study supports a major shift away from indwelling catheters. In addition, it provides strong arguments for greening urological practices worldwide.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which urinary drainage strategy has the lowest environmental impact?

According to the 30-day life cycle assessment, temporary urethral stents have the lowest environmental impact, reducing carbon emissions by 83% compared to indwelling catheters.

How does care delivery affect the sustainability of urological care?

Factors such as the frequency of device replacement and the distance a home nurse must travel to assist a patient can significantly increase the total environmental footprint.

Are reusable catheters more sustainable than disposable ones?

Yes, sensitivity analyses showed that reusable CISC catheters provide an environmental profile comparable to urethral stents, offering a more sustainable alternative to single-use options.

Disclaimer: This content is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Refer to the latest local and national guidelines for clinical practice.

References

Peyrottes A et al. Comparative 30-day life cycle assessment of bladder drainage strategies. BJU Int. 2026 May 11. doi: 10.1111/bju.70304. PMID: 42109204.

Elliott CS. Sustainability in Urology: Single-use Versus Reusable Catheters for Intermittent Catheterization. Eur Urol Focus. 2023 Nov;9(6):888-890.

Pathak R et al. Uncovering the Evidence for Sustainability in Urology: A Scoping Review. PMC. 2024.