##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57187/4873

Original article

Vol. 156 No. 4 (2026)

Energy consumption of cardiology intervention units: a comparative study of operational modes and procedure types

Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2026;156:4873
Published
14.04.2026

Summary

BACKGROUND: The healthcare sector is a major contributor to climate change, mainly due to greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation. Radiology imaging devices account for considerable energy consumption, but there is limited knowledge of the energy consumption of cardiac catheterisation units and of specific cardiac interventions.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify energy consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh) during diagnostic and therapeutic cardiac procedures and to identify potential areas for saving energy.

METHODS: Current transformers measured true power in three cardiac catheterisation units in May and June 2024. The data were matched to system operational modes ‘off’, ‘idle’ and ‘intervention’. Clinical software provided information about the intervention type, operators and dose-area product.

RESULTS: The total energy consumption was 6647.62 kWh, 76.5% of which was used for non-productive modes (62.8% ‘idle’ and 13.7% ‘off’). Interventions accounted for 23.5% of energy consumption and 9.1% of total time. The median (IQR) energy consumption of 564 performed interventions was 2.20 (2.02) kWh. Coronary interventions with ≥4 stents (4.86 [1.48] kWh) and mitral valve edge-to-edge repair (4.37 [2.59] kWh) used the most, while diagnostic coronary angiograms (0.91 [0.74] kWh) used the least energy from first to last scanning action. Energy consumption correlated significantly with intervention time (r = 0.98, p <0.001) and dose-area product (r = 0.62, p <0.001).

CONCLUSION: Non-productive operational modes accounted for more than ¾ of overall energy consumption. Reducing ‘idle’ energy consumption appears to have the largest energy-saving potential.

References

  1. 1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Summary for policymakers. Climate Change 2021 – The physical science basis: Working Group I contribution to the sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2023. pp. 3–32.
  2. 2. Health Care Without Harm, Arup. Health care’s climate footprint: how the health sector contributes to the global climate crisis and opportunities for action. Reston (VA): Health Care Without Harm; 2019 Sep.
  3. 3. United Nations. Causes and effects of climate change [Internet]. New York: United Nations; [date unknown] [cited 2025 Feb 20]. Available from: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/causes-effects-climate-change
  4. 4. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). World energy transitions outlook 2024: 1.5°C pathway [Internet]. Abu Dhabi: IRENA; 2024 Nov [cited 2025 Feb 20]. Available from: https://www.irena.org/Publications/2024/Nov/World-Energy-Transitions-Outlook-2024
  5. 5. Roletto A, Zanardo M, Bonfitto GR, Catania D, Sardanelli F, Zanoni S. The environmental impact of energy consumption and carbon emissions in radiology departments: a systematic review. Eur Radiol Exp. 2024 Feb;8(1):35. 10.1148/radiol.2020192084 doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-024-00424-6
  6. 6. Picano E, Mangia C, D’Andrea A. Climate change, carbon dioxide emissions, and medical imaging contribution. J Clin Med. 2022 Dec;12(1):215. 10.3390/jcm12010215
  7. 7. Heye T, Knoerl R, Wehrle T, Mangold D, Cerminara A, Loser M, et al. The energy consumption of radiology: energy- and cost-saving opportunities for CT and MRI operation. Radiology. 2020 Jun;295(3):593–605. 10.1148/radiol.2020192084
  8. 8. Blitzer D, Meinrenken CJ, Apelgren NB, Chavez XS, Durrenberger O, Jagdish AS, et al. Carbon emission analysis of aortic valve replacement: the environmental footprint of transcatheter vs. surgical procedures. Eur Heart J. 2025 Nov;46(44):4810–9. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf379
  9. 9. Vosshenrich J, Mangold D, Aberle C, Cerminara A, Seifert HH, Osswald S, et al. Interventional imaging systems in radiology, cardiology, and urology: energy consumption, carbon emissions, and electricity costs. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2024 Jun;222(6):e2430988. 10.2214/ajr.24.30988 doi: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.24.30988
  10. 10. Hutchison C. Bi-Plane vs. Single-Plane Cath Labs: What's the Difference? PatientImage [Internet]. 2024 Oct 29 [cited 2025 Nov 10]. Available from: https://www.patientimage.com/blog/bi-plane-vs-single-plane-cath-labs
  11. 11. Vajuhudeen Z, Ismail M, Wilczek M, et al. Dose area product [Internet]. Radiopaedia.org; 2022 Aug 6 [cited 2025 Nov 10]. doi: https://doi.org/10.53347/rID-80058
  12. 12. Thiel D. The CO2 content in Swiss electricity is increasing [Internet]. Brugg, (Switzerland): aliunid AG; 2023 Apr [cited 2025 Feb 20]. Available from: https://aliunid.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-media-information-aliunid-CO2-content-in-Swiss-electricity.pdf
  13. 13. Gendy D, Walters H, O’Mahony E, Zaman S. The scope for radiology to contribute to the NHS net zero target: findings from a survey of radiology staff in the UK. Clin Radiol. 2022 Aug;77(8):e667–72. 10.2214/ajr.24.30988 doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2022.05.002
  14. 14. Khanji MY, Patel R, Ricci F. Going green in cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2024 Feb;45(6):411–2. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad703
  15. 15. Huff S, David S, Boundy R, et al. Auto Stop-Start Fuel Consumption Benefits. SAE Tech Paper. 2023;2023-01-0346. doi: https://doi.org/10.4271/2023-01-0346
  16. 16. Rockall AG, Allen B, Brown MJ, El-Diasty T, Fletcher J, Gerson RF, et al. Sustainability in radiology: position paper and call to action from ACR, AOSR, ASR, CAR, CIR, ESR, ESRNM, ISR, IS3R, RANZCR, and RSNA. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2025 Feb;1754-9485.13842. 10.1111/1754-9485.13842
  17. 17. Greenhouse Gas Protocol. Corporate value chain (scope 3) accounting and reporting standard [Internet]. Washington (DC): World Resources Institute; 2013 Apr [cited 2025 Feb 20]. Available from: https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Corporate-Value-Chain-Accounting-Reporing-Standard_041613_2.pdf
  18. 18. Bundesamt für Energie (BFE). Stromverbrauch eines typischen Haushalts [Internet]. Bern (Switzerland): BFE; 2021 Aug [cited 2025 Feb 20]. Available from: https://pubdb.bfe.admin.ch/de/publication/download/10559
  19. 19. Biaggi P, Wyss C. Ökologische Nachhaltigkeit in der Kardiologie. info@herz+gefäss. Erlenbach (Switzerland): medinfo AG; 2025 Jan. p. 15.
  20. 20. Bundesamt für Statistik (BFS). Umweltindikator – CO2-Ausstoss von Personenwagen [Internet]. Bern (Switzerland): BFS; [cited 2025 Nov 18]. Available from: https://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/de/home/statistiken/raum-umwelt/umweltindikatoren/alle-indikatoren/reaktionen-der-gesellschaft/co2-ausstoss-personenwagen.html

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2