Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

The environmental and economic burden of surgical waste in ophthalmology operating rooms

Eye volume 38, pages 822–823 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

The last few years have brought about significant discussion regarding excessive and often needless surgical waste in ophthalmology. This was mainly amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic which led to thousands of tons of biomedical waste per day in the United States, India, and Brazil [1]. Previously seen as a necessity, in order to reduce the spread infection, now appears like a luxurious waste with an obscene amount of plastic packaging, instructions for use, and single use topical medications discarded during cataract surgeries. While this has been a topic of continued discussion, with over 90% of ophthalmologists in agreement that surgical waste is often excessive and unnecessary [2], there has yet to be any significant, systemic change in ophthalmology operating rooms. Our institution, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, shows no exception to this result, often producing excessive surgical waste.

As mentioned earlier, a majority of ophthalmic surgeons and surgical staff are in agreement that waste in operating rooms is excessive. Yet, many academic and private institutions have done little to make any significant change to the carbon footprint of ophthalmology. One possible detractor from making meaningful change in ophthalmology operating rooms is legal/professional liability. Endophthalmitis, among other infections, places significant pressure on institutions to mitigate risk by adopting an all-encompassing “one and done” policy on medications, instruments, and other operative tools to ultimately avoid medicolegal costs. Some of these policies may not be fully supported by existing medical literature [4].

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Surgical Waste in Ophthalmology Operating Rooms.

References

  1. Haque MS, Uddin S, Sayem SM, Mohib KM. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) induced waste scenario: A short overview. J Environ Chem Eng. 2021;9:104660.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chang DF, Thiel CL. Survey of cataract surgeons’ and nurses’ attitudes toward operating room waste. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020;46:933–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Oydanich M, Kass W, Khouri AS. Laser Induced Damage to Disposable Gonioscopy Lenses During Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty. J Glaucoma. 2022;31:e46–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ravindran RD, Venkatesh R, Chang DF, Sengupta S, Gyatsho J, Talwar B. Incidence of post-cataract endophthalmitis at Aravind Eye Hospital: outcomes of more than 42,000 consecutive cases using standardized sterilization and prophylaxis protocols. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35:629–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Namburar S, Pillai M, Varghese G, Thiel C, Robin AL. Waste generated during glaucoma surgery: A comparison of two global facilities. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep. 2018;12:87–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Ophthalmic Instrument Cleaning and Sterilization (OICS) Task Force (Chang DF, McCabe CM, et al.) and its Surgical Pharmaceutical Waste Subcommittee (Palmer DJ, Robin AL, et al.). Reducing topical drug waste in ophthalmic surgery. Multisociety Position Paper. American Academy of Ophthalmology; 2022.

  7. Khor HG, Cho I, Lee KRCK, Chieng LL. Waste production from phacoemulsification surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020;46:215–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA

    Marko Oydanich & Albert S. Khouri

Authors
  1. Marko Oydanich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Albert S. Khouri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ASK was responsible for study design. MO was responsible for literature review and drafting the report. Both ASK and MO edited and finalized the manuscript for publication.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Albert S. Khouri.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Disclosures for ASK: Grant support: Allergan, NJ Health Foundation, Consultant: Glaukos, Bausch & Lomb, Speaker Bureau: Allergan, Bausch & Lomb. No conflicting relationship exists for the remaining authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oydanich, M., Khouri, A.S. The environmental and economic burden of surgical waste in ophthalmology operating rooms. Eye 38, 822–823 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-023-02810-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-023-02810-7

Search

Advanced search

Quick links