Evidence Hub

Multicentre, open-label, phase IV, randomised trial testing superiority of individualised targeted antibiotic prophylaxis over empiric prophylaxis at ureteral stent removal following cystectomy: study protocol for the REINFORCE trial

Vejlgaard M, Stroomberg HV, Ynddal MS, Moser C, Joensen UN, Røder A

Trials, 2025

248 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Background: In the first months after cystectomy, the most frequent cause of readmission is infection from the urinary tract. Nonetheless, current guidelines are unable to provide evidence-based recommendations on preventative measures and, as a result, antibiotic prophylaxis varies across surgical centres. Most centres in Denmark administer empiric antibiotic prophylaxis at ureteral stent removal after cystectomy, where infection rates peak. However, data indicates that the postoperative urinary microbiota is composed of a wide range of bacteria, suggesting that the patients may benefit from an individualised approach. This trial aims to test whether targeted postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis can reduce infection-related readmissions after cystectomy compared to the current empiric approach.

Methods: We present a multicentre, open-label, superiority, randomised clinical trial using a group-sequential design. Participants will be randomly assigned with a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive one of two orally administered single-day antibiotic treatments on the day of ureteral stent removal: (a) standard-of-care pivmecillinam 400 mg morning, noon, and evening or (b) antibiotics targeted to the microbiota identified in a postoperative urine sample. The primary endpoint is the infection-related readmission rate after 90 postoperative days. Secondary endpoints include complication and readmission rates, days alive and out of hospital, quality of life, and microbiological isolates…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 248 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free