Indocyanine Green Is a Safe and Effective Alternative to Radioisotope in Breast Cancer Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy regardless of Patient Body Mass Index.

INTRODUCTION: A recent meta-analysis [Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:908-909] has confirmed high sensitivity of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence mapping for sentinel node detection in early breast cancer. Concerns have previously been raised regarding the efficacy in patients with high body mass index (BMI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNBs) for early breast cancer in NHS Tayside were included in a prospective audit of surgical and pathology findings. All patients included in the study received dual injection of patent blue dye and ICG. Approval was obtained from the local Caldicott guardian for collection and use of personal data. RESULTS: Of 239 cases, all were female patients of mean age 62 years (range 27-93). In 4.2% (10/239) of cases, neither blue dye nor ICG was present in the axilla. Of the remaining 229 SLNB cases in this series, surgeons documented retrieval of 451 nodes, with a mean surgical nodal count per case of 1.97 (range 1-5) and pathological nodal count of 2.15 (range 0-7). Eighty three cases were performed in patients with BMI 30-39.9 and 21 cases with BMI ≥40, with nodal detection rates of 96.4% (80/83) and 95.2% (20/21), respectively, in these groups of patients. Twenty percent (48/229) of cases had nodal metastases on histopathology. CONCLUSIONS: This is a large single-center study which demonstrates the safety and accuracy of the combined ICG and blue dye technique for SLNB in breast cancer. This is represented by nodal detection rates and node positivity rates which are comparable to previous multicenter studies of standard SLNB regardless of BMI.

Center-Effect of Incident Hemodialysis Vascular Access Use: Analysis of a Bi-national Registry.

Background: Commencing hemodialysis (HD) with an arteriovenous access is associated with superior patient outcomes compared with a catheter, but the majority of patients in Australia and New Zealand initiate HD with a central venous catheter. This study examined patient and center factors associated with arteriovenous fistula/graft access use at HD commencement. Methods: We included all adult patients starting chronic HD in Australia and New Zealand between 2004 and 2015. Access type at HD initiation was analyzed using logistic regression. Patient-level factors included sex, age, race, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, primary kidney disease, late nephrologist referral, comorbidities, and prior RRT. Center-level factors included size; transplant capability; home HD proportion; incident peritoneal dialysis (average number of patients commencing RRT with peritoneal dialysis per year); mean weekly HD hours; average blood flow; and achievement of phosphate, hemoglobin, and weekly Kt/V targets. The study included 27,123 patients from 61 centers. Results: Arteriovenous access use at HD commencement varied four-fold from 15% to 62% (median 39%) across centers. Incident arteriovenous access use was more likely in patients aged 51-72 years, males, and patients with a BMI of >25 kg/m2 and polycystic kidney disease; but use was less likely in patients with a BMI of <18.5 kg/m2, late nephrologist referral, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, chronic lung disease, and prior RRT. Starting HD with an arteriovenous access was less likely in centers with the highest proportion of home HD, and no center factor was associated with higher arteriovenous access use. Adjustment for center-level characteristics resulted in a 25% reduction in observed intercenter variability of arteriovenous access use at HD initiation compared with the model adjusted for only patient-level characteristics. Conclusions: This study identified several patient and center factors associated with incident HD access use, yet these factors did not fully explain the substantial variability in arteriovenous access use across centers.

Perioperative antibiotics for preventing post-surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant recipients are at high risk for infections due to the complexity of surgical procedures combined with the impact of immunosuppression. No consensus exists on the role of antibiotics for surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of prophylactic antimicrobial agents for preventing surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies was searched up to 21 April 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in any language assessing prophylactic antibiotics in preventing surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients at any time point after transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently determined study eligibility, assessed quality, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were surgical site infections and antimicrobial resistance. Other outcomes included urinary tract infections, pneumonias and septicaemia, death (any cause), graft loss, graft rejection, graft function, adverse reactions to antimicrobial agents, and outcomes identified by the Standardised Outcomes of Nephrology Group (SONG), specifically graft health, cardiovascular disease, cancer and life participation. Summary effect estimates were obtained using a random-effects model and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The quality of the evidence was assessed using the risk of bias and the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified eight eligible studies (718 randomised participants). Overall, five studies (248 randomised participants) compared antibiotics versus no antibiotics, and three studies (470 randomised participants) compared extended duration versus short duration antibiotics. Risk of bias was assessed as high for performance bias (eight studies), detection bias (eight studies) and attrition bias (two studies). It is uncertain whether antibiotics reduce the incidence of surgical site infections as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.85; 5 studies, 226 participants; I2 = 25%). The certainty of the evidence was very low for all other reported outcomes (death, graft loss, and other infections). It is uncertain whether extended duration antibiotics reduces the incidence of surgical site infections in either solid organ transplant recipients (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.48; 2 studies, 302 participants; I2 = 0%) or kidney-only transplant recipients (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.48; 1 study, 205 participants) as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low. The certainty of the evidence was very low for all other reported outcomes (death, graft loss, and other infections). None of the eight included studies evaluated antimicrobial agent adverse reactions, graft health, cardiovascular disease, cancer, life participation, biochemical and haematological parameters, intervention cost, hospitalisation length, or overall hospitalisation costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to methodological limitations, risk of bias and significant heterogeneity, the current evidence for the use of prophylactic perioperative antibiotics in transplantation is of very low quality. Further high quality, adequately powered RCTs would help better inform clinical practice.