Recommended antibiotic prophylaxis regimen in retrograde intrarenal surgery: evidence from a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the incidence of postoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) following different antibiotic prophylaxis (ABP) regimens in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Single-centre, randomised, controlled trial (August 2014-September 2017) including 426 patients with renal stones with preoperative sterile urine managed by RIRS (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02304822). Different ciprofloxacin-based ABP regimens were used and included a zero dose, single dose (30 min before surgery) or two doses (first dose at 30 min before RIRS and additional dose within 6 h after RIRS). The incidence of SIRS was compared using intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. RESULTS: Each group enrolled 142 patients. In the ITT analysis, a zero dose of ABP was statistically similar to the two ABP regimes for the incidence of SIRS (9.9% vs single dose 4.9%, P = 0.112; vs two doses 4.2%, P = 0.062). There were also no relevant differences across groups in the PP analysis; no urosepsis was recorded. In subgroup analysis with stratification by stone area, the three regimens all had a low and similar incidence of SIRS for stones of ≤200 mm2 in the ITT analysis with a sufficient power value (5.4% vs 6.2% vs 3.6%, P = 0.945 vs single dose and P = 0.553 vs two doses). However, there was a greater chance of SIRS in patients who received no ABP with stones of >200 mm2 (18% vs single dose 4.3%, P = 0.036; vs two doses 5.5%, P = 0.044). Similar trends were seen in the PP analysis. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with preoperative sterile urine, ABP is not strongly recommended in patients with stones of ≤200 mm2 , but for stones >200 mm2 single-dose ABP is still required.

Small renal mass biopsy--how, what and when: report from an international consensus panel.

To discuss the use of renal mass biopsy (RMB) for small renal masses (SRMs), formulate technical aspects, outline potential pitfalls and provide recommendations for the practicing clinician. The meeting was conducted as an informal consensus process and no scoring system was used to measure the levels of agreement on the different topics. A moderated general discussion was used as the basis for consensus and arising issues were resolved at this point. A consensus was established and lack of agreement to topics or specific items was noted at this point. Recommended biopsy technique: at least two cores, sampling different tumour regions with ultrasonography being the preferred method of image guidance. Pathological interpretation: 'non-diagnostic samples' should refer to insufficient material, inconclusive and normal renal parenchyma. For non-diagnostic samples, a repeat biopsy is recommended. Fine-needle aspiration may provide additional information but cannot substitute for core biopsy. Indications for RMB: biopsy is recommended in most cases except in patients with imaging or clinical characteristics indicative of pathology (syndromes, imaging characteristics) and cases whereby conservative management is not contemplated. RMB is recommended for active surveillance but not for watchful-waiting candidates. We report the results of an international consensus meeting on the use of RMB for SRMs, defining the technique, pathological interpretation and indications.