Current American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines recommend antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing cystoscopy with manipu- lation (including ureteral stent removal). However, there is little evidence that this practice prevents UTI. Our objective was to investigate current practice patterns of urologists in the use of antibiotic prophylaxis prior to ureteral stent removal. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was distributed to members of the Endourological Society. The survey included questions about provider demographics, personal practice for ureteral stent use and removal, and antibiotics prophylaxis prior to stent removal. RESULTS: Of the 2,544 urologists invited to participate, 284 (11%) completed the survey. Demographic information is outlined in Table 1. Half do not prescribe antibiotics while the stent is in place. Of those who give antibiotic prophylaxis before stent removal, 52% prescribe a single dose. There is variation in antibiotic prophylaxis by method of stent removal and surgery leading to stent placement (Figure 1). Forty-three percent do not obtain a urine culture (UC) prior to stent removal. For those who obtain a UC, duration of antibiotic treatment varies based on UC results (Figure 2). Main factors influencing practice are AUA guidelines, personal experience, patient history of UTI and UC results. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variation in practice among urologists regarding antibiotic prophylaxis prior to stent removal. Without evidence to support this practice, patients may be exposed unnecessarily to harm related to antibiotic use without a clear benefit. This lack of consensus highlights the need for additional research and development of guidelines. Source of Funding: None MP39-17 CURRENT PUBLICATION TRENDS IN UROLOGY LITERATURE Adam Schatz*, Anke Wang, Yasamin Ghiasi, Seamus Barrett, Aman Kumar, Jennifer Cha, Adria Lam, Shruthi Perati, Angela Zheng, Charles Welliver, Albany, NY INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Original research in urology journals has not been systematically assessed for quality in several years. Topic selection and measurements of quality may reflect the overall relevance of urology publications to their general urologist audience. In this study we seek to assess measures of quality of a selection of original research published in three major urology journals to identify temporal trends. METHODS: All original research articles from the months of January, February, and March from the years 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2017 in the Journal of Urology (JU), British Journal of Urology In- ternational (BJUI), and European Urology (EU) were assessed for multiple measures of research quality and article type. This includes topic; use of control, blinding, and randomization; single- vs. multi- center data; prospective vs retrospective data; use of administrative databases. Articles were independently assessed by two reviewers, who were blinded to each other’s assessment. A senior reviewer then compared the collected data for concordance and accuracy of assessment. Trends in the data were assessed between journals and over time. RESULTS: 1,285 articles were assessed. Trends in topics are reported in Table 1. Differences between journals are reported in Table 2. Data regarding quality metrics and classifications are reported in Table 3. Vol. 201, No. 4S, Supplement, Saturday, May 4, 2019 THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY Ò e551 Copyright © 2019 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.