Effect of Intraprostatic Local Anesthesia During Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy: Comparison of 3 Methods in a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial

What is the most effective local anesthesia for transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of 47 randomized clinical trials

We aimed to compare the effectiveness of various local anesthetic methods for controlling prostate biopsy (PBx) related pain using network meta-analysis. Literature searches were performed on PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to March 2018. Forty-seven randomized controlled trials, in which the effectiveness of PBx-related pain was investigated using a visual analogue scale after various local anesthetic methods, were included. The local anesthetic methods included intraprostatic local anesthesia (IPLA), intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA), intravenous sedation (IVS), periprostatic nerve block (PNB), pelvic plexus block (PPB), and spinal anesthesia (SPA). Eight pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses with 21 comparisons were performed. All modalities, except single use of IPLA and IRLA, were more effective than placebo. Our results demonstrate that PNB + IVS (rank 1) and SPA (rank 2) were the most effective methods for pain control. The followings are in order of PPB + IRLA, PNB + IPLA, PPB, PNB + IRLA, IVS, and PNB. In conclusion, the most effective way to alleviate PBx-related pain appears to be PNB + IVS and SPA. However, a potential increase in medical cost and additional risk of morbidities should be considered. In the current outpatient setting, PPB + IRLA, PNB + IPLA, PPB, PNB + IRLA, and PNB methods are potentially more acceptable options.

Local anesthesia for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of local anesthesia in alleviating pain during prostate biopsy. We searched relevant articles in PubMed and Embase. The included studies should be randomized controlled trials (RCT) using local anesthesia to alleviate pain during biopsy, which was recorded by a pain scale. Analgesic efficacy of different local anesthesia techniques were analyzed, including intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA), periprostatic nerve block (PNB), pelvic plexus block (PPB) and intraprostatic local anesthesia (IPLA). We included 46 RCTs. PNB significantly reduced pain score compared with placebo (-1.27 [95% confidence interval [95% CI] -1.72, -0.82]) or no injection (-1.01 [95% CI -1.2, -0.82]). IRLA with prilocaine-lidocaine cream could also reduced pain (-0.45 [95% CI -0.76, -0.15]), while the IRLA with lidocaine gel was not effective (-0.1 [95% CI -0.24, 0.04]). PNB lateral to the neurovascular bundle had better analgesic effect than at prostate apex (P = 0.02). Combination use of PPB and IRLA considerably alleviated pain of patients compared with the combination of PNB and IRLA (-1.32 [95% CI -1.59, -1.06]). In conclusion, local anesthesia could alleviate patients' pain during the prostate biopsy. PNB was not so effective as PPB.

Local anesthesia for pain control during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intrarectal local anesthestic (IRLA), periprostatic nerve block (PPNB), and the combined modalities in alleviating the pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was performed to identify all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about IRLA vs no anesthesia or placebo gel; PPNB vs no injection, periprostatic placebo injection, or IRLA; combined PPNB and IRLA vs PPNB alone; and combined PPNB and intraprostatic nerve block (IPNB) vs PPNB alone before TRUS-guided biopsy. Sources included MEDILINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from 1980 to 2016. The main outcomes were biopsy pain score, probe manipulation pain score, and anesthetic infiltration pain score assessed by the visual pain scale.

RESULTS

A total of 26 articles involving 36 RCTs were used in this analysis: Although IRLA can lead to pain reduction, the result was not statistically significant when compared with no anesthesia or placebo gel (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.22, 95% CI: -0.45 to 0, P=0.06). PPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with no analgesia (WMD: -1.32, 95% CI: -1.68 to -0.95, P<0.00001), placebo injection (WMD: -2.62, 95% CI: -3.16 to -2.07, P<0.00001), or IRLA (WMD: -1.31, 95% CI: -1.40 to -1.22, P<0.00001). PPNB + IRLA can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.45, 95% CI: -0.62 to -0.28, P<0.00001). PPNB + IPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.73, 95% CI: -0.92 to -0.55, P<0.00001). There were no severe reported general or local complications related to local anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that a combination of PPNB and IRLA/IPNB is effective and safe in alleviating the pain during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to validate this result.

Complications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy

CONTEXT

Prostate biopsy (PB) represents the gold standard method to confirm the presence of cancer. In addition to traditional random or systematic approaches, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided technique has been introduced recently.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of complications after transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided, transperineal, and MRI-guided PB.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a systematic literature search of Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases up to October 2015, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Complications and mortality following random, systematic, and image-guided PBs were reviewed. Eighty-five references were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The most frequent complication after PB was minor and self-limiting bleeding (hematuria and hematospermia), regardless of the biopsy approach. Occurrence of rectal bleeding was comparable for traditional TRUS-guided and image-guided PBs. Almost 25% of patients experienced lower urinary tract symptoms, but only a few had urinary retention, with higher rates after a transperineal approach. Temporary erectile dysfunction was not negligible, with a return to baseline after 1-6 mo. The incidence of infective complications is increasing, with higher rates among men with medical comorbidities and older age. Transperineal and in-bore MRI-targeted biopsy may reduce the risk of severe infectious complications. Mortality after PB is uncommon, regardless of biopsy technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications after PB are frequent but often self-limiting. The incidence of hospitalization due to severe infections is continuously increasing. The patient's general health status, risk factors, and likelihood of antimicrobial resistance should be carefully appraised before scheduling a PB.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed the variety and incidence of complications after prostate biopsy. Even if frequent, complications seldom represent a problem for the patient. The most troublesome complications are infections. To minimize this risk, the patient's medical condition should be carefully evaluated before biopsy.

Selective Low-Dose Spinal Anesthesia for Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective and Randomized Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the use of spinal anesthesia by reducing anesthetic agent dose to provide better analgesia with minimal side effects without sacrificing the outpatient setting for prostate biopsy. In this study, efficacy and tolerability of selective low-dose spinal anesthesia versus intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA) plus periprostatic nerve blockade (PPNB) were compared.

METHODS

Between September 2012 and April 2013, 100 patients, aged 40 to 80 years, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥4 ng/mL, abnormal digital rectal examinations, and enrolled for biopsy were included in the present study. Ensuring double blindness, pain was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS). Anal sphincter relaxation, patient satisfaction with the anesthesia technique, and motor response were evaluated.

RESULTS

Differences between the two groups, considering age, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, total PSA, prostate volume, anesthesia duration, and cancer presence, were not statistically significant. Pain experienced during probe insertion, biopsy, and 30 minutes after biopsy was significantly lower in the low-dose spinal anesthesia group (P < 0.0001). Anal sphincter relaxation degree was significantly higher in the spinal group (P < 0.001). Patient procedure-related overall satisfaction level was significantly higher in the spinal anesthesia group (P < 0.001). In the spinal anesthesia group, no motor blockade was observed. Between the two groups, no statistically significant difference was seen with regard to complications (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Selective low-dose spinal anesthesia provides better pain relief than PPNB plus IRLA without sacrificing the day case setting in ambulatory practice. It is also associated with high patient satisfaction and willingness for a repeated biopsy without differences in procedure duration, tolerance, and complications.

Local anesthesia type affects cancer detection rate in transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy

PURPOSE

Studies about the anesthesia techniques during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx) are usually focused on pain relief. Although patients' tolerance is an important issue in TRUS-Bx, cancer detection rate (CDR) must not be ignored. In this study, we compared the impact of intrarectal lidocaine gel anesthesia (IRLA) and periprostatic nerve blockade (PNB) techniques on CDR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 422 patients underwent 10 core-TRUS-Bx because of elevated serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level (>2.5ng/mL) and/or suspicious digital rectal examination findings. Patients were divided into two groups according to the applied anesthesia technique: IRLA group and PNB group. Age, serum PSA level, prostate volume, visual analogue scale (VAS) score and CDR were recorded and compared statistically with chi square and unpaired t-tests.

RESULTS

Of the patients 126/422 (29.9%) underwent TRUS-Bx by using IRLA whereas 296/422 (70.1 %) by PNB technique. The mean, age, serum PSA level and prostate volume were similar between the two groups. CDR was 19.8% and 25.4% in IRLA and PNB groups, respectively (p=0.001). The mean VAS score of the PNB group (1.84±0.89) was significantly lower than that for IRLA group (3.62±1.06) (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results revealed that PNB is superior to IRLA in terms of CDR. Further studies are required to confirm our findings.

Is periprostatic nerve block a gold standard in case of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy?

Introduction:

Controversy exists over the pain during prostate biopsy. Periprostatic nerve block (PNB) is a gold standard anesthetic technique during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. Recent studies showed that PNB alone is insufficient as analgesic. We compared the efficacy of tramadol and intraprostatic nerve block (INB) in addition to PNB.

Materials and Methods:

We conducted a prospective double blinded placebo controlled study at our institute in 150 consecutive patients. Patients were randomized into three groups. Group A received PNB with INB with 1% lignocaine. Group B received oral tramadol with PNB. Group C patients were administered PNB only with 1% lignocaine. Patients were asked to grade the pain level using 11 point linear visual analog scale (VAS) at the time of ultrasound probe insertion, at time of anesthesia, during biopsy, and 30 min after biopsy.

Results:

The study groups were comparable in demographic profile, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, and prostate size. Group A recorded the minimum mean pain score of 2.66 during prostate biopsy which was significantly lower than group 3 (P < 0.001). Group B recorded significantly lower pain score at time of probe insertion and at anesthetic needle insertion than other two groups.

Conclusions:

PNB provides better pain control in TRUS-guided prostate biopsy but still there is need of additional analgesic in the form of tramadol or INB. Tramadol has advantage of oral intake and analgesic effect at time of probe insertion and at nerve block. Both tramadol and INB may be used in combination along with PNB.

Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy

CONTEXT

Prostate biopsy is commonly performed for cancer detection and management. The benefits and risks of prostate biopsy are germane to ongoing debates about prostate cancer screening and treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of complications from prostate biopsy.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase, supplemented with additional references. Articles were reviewed for data on the following complications: hematuria, rectal bleeding, hematospermia, infection, pain, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), urinary retention, erectile dysfunction, and mortality.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

After biopsy, hematuria and hematospermia are common but typically mild and self-limiting. Severe rectal bleeding is uncommon. Despite antimicrobial prophylaxis, infectious complications are increasing over time and are the most common reason for hospitalization after biopsy. Pain may occur at several stages of prostate biopsy and can be mitigated by anesthetic agents and anxiety-reduction techniques. Up to 25% of men have transient LUTS after biopsy, and <2% have frank urinary retention, with slightly higher rates reported after transperineal template biopsy. Biopsy-related mortality is rare.

CONCLUSIONS

Preparation for biopsy should include antimicrobial prophylaxis and pain management. Prostate biopsy is frequently associated with minor bleeding and urinary symptoms that usually do not require intervention. Infectious complications can be serious, requiring prompt management and continued work into preventative strategies.

Efficacy of Periprostatic Anesthesia according to Lidocaine Dose during Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy of the Prostate

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of periprostatic lidocaine injection according to lidocaine dose during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The subjects of this study were 92 patients who had undergone transrectal ultrasound-guided 12-core biopsy of the prostate. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups: group 1 (n=31, no lidocaine injection), group 2 (n=30, periprostatic injection of 10 ml 1% lidocaine), and group 3 (n=31, periprostatic injection of 20 ml 1% lidocaine). The patients were assessed for pain by use of a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) and for other complications after the procedure.

RESULTS

The mean VAS scores of groups 1 through 3 were 0.93±0.89, 1.32±1.37, and 1.13±1.10, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the three groups. However, the mean VAS score of the biopsy pain was 5.0±1.48, 3.93±1.94, and 3.60±2.15, in the same groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences between group 1 and the other groups. Patients in groups 2 and 3 reported significantly less biopsy pain than did group 1 patients (p=0.004, 0.021), with no statistically significant difference in VAS score between groups 2 and 3 (p=0.533). With respect to post-biopsy complications, there were no significant differences in the incidence of hematuria, hematospermia, rectal bleeding, or infection among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Periprostatic injection of local anesthesia with lidocaine was associated with significantly less pain than in the absence of anesthesia. Furthermore, a 20-ml dose of lidocaine produced no better pain control than did a 10-ml lidocaine dose for prostate biopsy.

Comparative Evaluation of Periprostatic Nerve Block with and without Intraprostatic Nerve Block in Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostatic Needle Biopsy

Purpose

Controversy exists over the pain during prostate biopsy. Periprostatic nerve block is a commonly used anaesthetic technique during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. The recent trend toward increasing the number of cores has become popular. This practice further increases the need for a proper anaesthetic application. We compared the efficacy of periprostatic nerve block with or without intraprostatic nerve block.

Materials and Methods

We conducted a prospective double-blinded placebo-controlled study at our institute with 142 consecutive patients. Patients were randomly assigned into 3 groups. Group 1 received periprostatic nerve block with intraprostatic nerve block with 1% lignocaine. Group 2 patients were administered periprostatic nerve block only with 1% lignocaine. Group 3 received no anaesthesia. Patients were asked to grade their level of pain by using an 11-point linear analogue scale at the time of ultrasound probe insertion, at the time of anaesthesia, during biopsy, and 30 minutes after biopsy.

Results

The study groups were comparable in demographic profile, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and prostate size. The mean pain scores at the time of biopsy in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 2.70, 3.39, and 4.16, respectively. Group 1 recorded the minimum mean pain score of 2.70 during prostate biopsy, which was significantly lower than the scores of groups 2 and 3 (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in pain scores among the 3 groups during probe insertion, during anaesthesia, or at 30 minutes after biopsy (p>0.05).

Conclusions

Periprostatic nerve block with intraprostatic nerve block provides better pain control than does periprostatic nerve block alone in TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Visual pain score during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy using no anaesthesia or three different types of local anaesthetic application

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the pain score during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy using three different anaesthetic applications and no anaesthesia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One-hundred men undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy were prospectively enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized to four groups. Group 1 (n = 25) received no anaesthesia, group 2 (n = 25) was administered a perianal lidocaine injection, group 3 (n = 25) was administered a periprostatic lidocaine injection, and group 4 (n = 25) was administered a combination of perianal-intrarectal lidocaine-prilocaine cream. The anaesthetic application was given 5 min before the procedure. All patients were asked to indicate the level of pain experienced on a visual analogue scale (VAS) during three situations, including when the TRUS probe was inserted and 15 min and 2 weeks after biopsy.

RESULTS

Mean pain scores were similar in all groups at the time of probe insertion. Mean pain scores showed statistically significant differences between group 1 and the other groups, except for group 4, 15 min after the procedure. Group 3 showed better pain control 15 min after biopsy and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.043).The VAS scores were similar 2 weeks after the procedure in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Anaesthetic application before TRUS-guided prostate biopsy may be advocated. The application of periprostatic lidocaine seems to be the most advantageous method for lowering the perception of pain.

Intraprostatic local anesthesia with periprostatic nerve block for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy

PURPOSE

Prostate biopsy is an invasive procedure that may be painful and require some form of anesthesia. We compared the pain control results of periprostatic nerve block alone vs periprostatic nerve block with intraprostatic anesthesia as local anesthesia for prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 300 patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy were randomized into 3 groups. Group 1 of 100 patients received periprostatic nerve block and intraprostatic local anesthesia with 5 ml 2% lidocaine. Group 2 of 100 patients received periprostatic nerve block and the same amount of 0.9% NaCl by intraprostatic injection. Group 3 of 100 patients received no anesthesia. Patients were asked to use a scale of 0 to 10 to complete a visual analog scale questionnaire about pain during probe insertion, anesthesia and biopsy.

RESULTS

Pain control was similar during probe insertion and anesthesia in the 3 groups (p = 0.885 and 0.227, respectively). Pain during biopsy in group 1 was significantly less than in groups 2 and 3 (p <0.0001). In patients with a smaller prostate volume (48 ml or less) these differences were still significant between group 1 and 2 (p <0.0001), although not in patients with a larger prostate volume (greater than 48 ml) (p = 0.185). In patients 66 years old or younger these differences were also significant in groups 1 and 2 (p <0.0001) but not in older patients (p = 0.155).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining periprostatic nerve block and intraprostatic local anesthesia provided significantly better pain control than periprostatic nerve block alone. The combination may be of maximum benefit in patients with a smaller prostate volume or younger patients.