Introduction

The global burden of Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), encompassing ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD), is increasing. Due to its chronic nature, IBD entails long-term healthcare resource use, contributing to substantial economic and environmental costs. Digestive endoscopy, while a cornerstone of disease monitoring, is associated with high energy consumption, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and medical waste. Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) has emerged as a non-invasive, accurate, and potentially more sustainable alternative.

Aims & Methods

The present study aimed to compare the environmental impacts in terms of CO₂ emissions, energy consumption (kWh), and disposable waste of IUS and endoscopy for therapeutic monitoring in IBD. In this single-center, retrospective observational study conducted at IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (Rozzano, Milan), all consecutive IUS and lower gastrointestinal endoscopies performed for therapeutic monitoring in IBD patients between January 2022 and December 2025 were included. Procedures for oncologic surveillance in long-standing disease, isolated rectal involvement (<15 cm from the anal verge), or without confirmed IBD were excluded. Clinical and procedural data were collected. Environmental metrics such as CO₂ emissions, energy consumption (kWh), and disposable waste were estimated using validated conversion factors and compared using appropriate statistical tests (Independent-samples t-test or Mann–Whitney U test).

Results

Endoscopic procedures performed during study period (n=2698) ↓ Exclusion criteria - Endoscopic procedures in trial setting (n=1157) -Endoscopic surveillance in UC (n= 216) -Pouchoscopies & ulcerative proctitis monitoring (n=162) - Operative/ emergency procedures (n=71) ↓ Endoscopic procedures included in the analysis (n=1092) Colonoscopies (n= 710)↵ ↳ Sigmoidoscopies (n=382)

intestinal ultrasounds performed during study period (n=1541) ↓ Exclusion criteria - Indications other than disease monitoring/ patient BMI> 30 Kg/m2 (n= 231) ↓ Intestinal ultrasounds included in the analysis (n=1310) ​

Flowchart 1. Visual representation of the process of selecting procedures to be included in the final analysis. UC: Ulcerative colitis; BMI: Body Mass Index.

During the study period, a total of 1092 endoscopic procedures, comprising 710 colonoscopies and 382 sigmoidoscopies, along with 1310 IUS were performed in 1028 IBD patients (58% UC, 42% CD). Estimated resource use for all endoscopic procedures totaled 1,256 kWh of electricity, 72,080 L of CO₂ emissions, and 585.6 kg of disposable waste, based on procedural averages (~1.5 kWh, 80 L of CO₂, 650 g waste per colonoscopy; ~50% of values for sigmoidoscopies). In contrast, IUS was associated with an estimated 524 kWh of electricity and 196.5 kg of disposable waste (average ~0.4 kWh, almost no CO₂ consumption, 150 g waste per exam). Compared to endoscopy, IUS reduced energy use by 82%, CO₂ emissions by 95%, and waste generation by 66% (P < 0.05 for all comparisons).

Conclusion

While gastrointestinal endoscopy remains indispensable in certain clinical scenarios, its environmental impact is considerable. In contrast, IUS emits almost no equivalent of CO₂, consumes significantly less energy per examination and produces negligible wastes. For therapeutic monitoring in IBD, IUS has demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy with a markedly lower ecological footprint. These findings promote IUS as a sustainable and environmentally friendly alternative for routine IBD monitoring in appropriate scenarios.

Disclosure

A Armuzzi has received consulting and/or advisory board fees from AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli-Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Mylan, Pfizer, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Takeda, lecture and/or speaker bureau fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Arena, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli-Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Takeda, Tigenix, and research grants from MSD, Pfizer, Takeda and Biogen. A Repici received consulting fee from Medtronic, Fuji and Olympus and has received research grant from Alfa Sigma, Norgine, Boston and Erbe. C Bezzio received speaker’s fees and consulting fees from for Takeda, MSD, Ferring, Abbvie, Galapagos and Janssen. A Dal Buono has received speaker’s fees from Pfizer, MSD, Eli-Lilly, Celltrion, Janssen, and consulting fees from Ferring. R Gabbiadini has received speaker’s fees from Pfizer, MSD, Ferring, Eli-Lilly, Celltrion, Janssen, consulting fees from Pfizer and Abbvie. G. Privitera has received speaker’s fees from Janssen and Alphasigma. B. Masoni and G. Franchellucci declare no conflict of interests.

Introduction

Although endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) remains the standard intervention for Crohn’s disease (CD)-associated strictures, its efficacy is limited by high recurrence and surgery rates. Retrospective analyses suggest endoscopic stricturotomy (ES) may offer superior outcomes, particularly in anastomotic strictures. However, no randomized trials have directly compared EBD and ES for short CD-related strictures.

Aims & Methods

This single-center, randomized controlled trial (August 2022–March 2025) enrolled adult CD patients (18–65 years) with symptomatic, predominantly fibrotic or mixed, short strictures (<3 cm), including both de novo and anastomotic types, accessible via standard endoscopy. Patients with multiple (>2) strictures, strictures beyond endoscopic reach, or prior stricturotomy were excluded. Participants were randomized to undergo either EBD or ES. The primary outcome was clinical recurrence at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included re-intervention, surgery, emergency visits, hospitalization, technical success, and adverse events.

Results

Out of 70 randomized patients, 69 were analyzed (EBD: 35; ES: 34). Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Technical success was similar (EBD: 91.4%, ES: 94.1%). On time to event analysis, clinical recurrence was significantly lower in the ES group (OR=0.343, 95% CI: 0.134–0.881; p=0.026). Re-intervention rates favored ES (EBD: 25.7%, ES: 8.8%; OR=0.337, 95% CI: 0.131–0.870; p=0.025). Surgery rates were numerically lower with ES (EBD: 11.4%, ES: 5.9%) but not statistically significant (p=0.581). Hospitalization was significantly more frequent in the EBD arm (OR=0.276, 95% CI: 0.091–0.840; p=0.023). ED visits also trended lower with ES, though not statistically significant (p=0.062) (see table). Adverse events occurred in 25.7% of EBD patients (bleeding n=3 [1 hemoclip], pain with admission n=3, micro-perforation n=1, post-procedure pain n=2) and 14.7% of ES patients (bleeding n=3 [1 self-limited, 1 coagrasper, 1 hemoclip], none required transfusion, suspected perforation n=1, mild pain n=1).

Outcome	EBD (n=35)	ES (n=34)	p-value	Odds Ratio (95% CI)
Technical Success (%)	91.4% (32/35)	94.1% (32/34)	0.70	-
Clinical Recurrence (%)	48.6%	23.5%	0.026	0.343 (0.134–0.881)
Re-intervention Rate (%)	25.7%	8.8%	0.025	0.337 (0.131–0.870)
Surgery (%)	11.4%	5.9%	0.581	0.707 (0.207–2.422)
Stricture-related ED Visits (%)	20.0%	11.8%	0.062	0.404 (0.156–1.047)
Stricture-related Hospitalizations (%)	25.7%	8.8%	0.023	0.276 (0.091–0.840)
Any Adverse Event (%)	25.7% (9/35)	14.7% (5/34)	0.45	-

Conclusion

In this interim analysis, ES was associated with significantly lower clinical recurrence, re-intervention, and hospitalization compared to EBD for short CD-related strictures, with similar safety outcomes. These findings support ES as a potentially superior first-line endoscopic strategy over EBD in selected patients with Crohn’s disease strictures. (NCT05521867)

References

Lan N, Shen B. Endoscopic Stricturotomy Versus Balloon Dilation in the Treatment of Anastomotic Strictures in Crohn's Disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2018 Mar 19;24(4):897-907. doi: 10.1093/ibd/izx085. PMID: 29546384.