gauge was not documented in 8% of procedures. No 14G biopsy devices were used. The median number of passes per procedure was 3 for RMS and 2 for IR (p = 0.11). Median glomerular yield per biopsy was 18 for RMS and 18.6 for IR (p = 0.84). Non-diagnostic biopsies occurred in 8% of RMS and 13% of IR biopsies (p = 0.52). 3% of RMS PRB required post-PRB blood transfusion (n=2). Macroscopic haematuria occurred in 3% of RMS biopsies. None of the 23 IR PRB required transfusion however 35% received routine gel foam haemostasis. This may contribute to a decreased incidence of bleeding post-procedure. No invasive procedures for bleeding were required in either group. IR performed 0% of 71 PRB in 2014. However, by 2017 IR completed 13% of 104 PRB. Conclusions: This preliminary audit in a single centre identifies that PRB is a safe procedure in adult patients with kidney disease despite periprocedural hypertension in over half of patients. The transfusion rate at 2% was higher than the 0.9% transfusion rate previously reported. Glomerular yield per PRB was comparable between IR and RT. There were higher rates of non-diagnostic IR biopsies-however this may be confounded by referral bias. There is a trend toward an increasing number of PRB being performed by IR. These findings underscore the need for renewed and ongoing Nephrology and IR dialogue regarding clinical training, workforce roles and multidisciplinary care.

The United Nations Security Council’s targeted sanctions seek to protect global peace and security. The majority of these sanctions are imposed on individuals deemed to be a terror threat and include measures such as asset freezes and travel bans. These measures can impede, inter alia, the right to private life and freedom of movement of targeted individuals. While it is accepted that certain rights can be restricted for the protection of public security, restrictions must be proportional under international human rights law. Given that UN sanctions regimes have come under scrutiny in recent years for their lack of procedural safeguards and disproportionate restrictions on fundamental rights, this article argues that proportionality based reasoning should be included in sanctions committees’ substantive decision-making processes. Other procedural safeguards should also be incorporated by UN sanctions committees. This would help ensure that sanctions are more measured and minimise impairment of human rights.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract