The Penetration of Renal Mass Biopsy in Daily Practice: A Survey Among Urologists

Background and Purpose: The vast increase in recent publications on renal mass biopsy (RMB) suggests an increased interest in the subject. The objective of the survey was to assess the use of RMB in current urologic practice, including related factors such as indications and patterns in practice. Methods: The link to a web-based questionnaire (www.surveymonkey.com) was sent to all registered e-mail addresses (1854) of members of the Endourological Society in December 2010. The questionnaire contained six epidemiologic questions, 10 regarding patterns of practice, one regarding the influence of the literature, and one on future techniques. Chi-square test (for trends) was used to assess statistical significant differences among categorical answers. Results: In total, 190 responders completed the survey of whom 73% indicated performing RMB "never" or "rarely" compared with 9% performing RMB in 25% to 100% of cases. Thirteen percent of responders reported never to take a RMB. Of the latter, significantly fewer practice in university hospitals (6% vs 20%-30%, P = 0.003). Main indications to perform RMB are still tumors in solitary/transplant kidneys and in metastatic disease. Lack of influence on clinical management and risk of false negatives were the main reasons not to perform biopsies. Sixty-one percent prefer histological biopsies compared with 8% who prefer cytological aspiration; 31% indicated that they combine both techniques. Other tissue differentiation techniques (Optical Coherence Tomography, Raman-spectroscopy) are unknown to 65% of urologists. Conclusion: RMB is not yet applied widely in urologic practice, with academic urologists performing RMB less infrequently. Core biopsies are still preferred, although combined with cytologic punctures by a considerable number of responders.