Pain after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: the advantages of periprostatic local anaesthesia

Effect of Sedation Anesthesia With Intravenous Propofol on Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Sedation anesthesia during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy is known to decrease patient pain and anxiety, but little is known whether it affects the procedure's prostate cancer detection and complication rates. This study aimed to determine the effect of sedation anesthesia with intravenous (IV) propofol on TRUS-guided prostate biopsy outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 2,119 patients who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy between November 2009 and February 2019 was undertaken. The patients were divided into two groups: patients who underwent sedation anesthesia with IV propofol and patients who underwent local anesthesia with intrarectal lidocaine gel instillation. Cancer detection and complication rates were compared between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression and multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the effects of sedation anesthesia with IV propofol on prostate cancer detection and complication rates.

RESULTS

The cancer detection rate of patients in the sedation group was 34.0%, whereas it was 29.2% in the local group (P = 0.024). Multivariate logistic regression analysis regarding factors associated with cancer detection rate after TRUS-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prostate specific antigen (PSA) < 10 showed that IV propofol usage, age, PSA density and core length were significant factors. Multivariate logistic regression analysis regarding factors associated with complications (voiding dysfunction, bleeding and infection) showed that IV propofol usage, age and prostate size were significant factors for voiding dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

Sedation anesthesia with IV propofol during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy was associated with a higher cancer detection rate than local anesthesia with intrarectal lidocaine gel instillation. Cancer detection rate could be an important factor to consider when selecting for the optimal anesthesia for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: periprostatic block versus caudal block for analgesia—a randomized trial

Background

Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy is a potentially painful procedure, due to the insertion of the TRUS probe in the anus and multiple passes of the biopsy needle through the rectum and prostate. Several methods of reducing pain and discomfort have been described. These include intra-rectal local anaesthetic gel (IRLA) instillation, periprostatic nerve block (PPNB), caudal block (CB) and oral analgesics. CB has potential complications of dural puncture and anaesthetic failure, while PPNB may be complicated by intravascular injection with systemic local anaesthetic toxicity. Only few studies have compared transrectal PPNB with CB with equivocal results. This study compared transrectal PPNB to CB in terms of efficacy of analgesia and incidence of complications.

Methods

A prospective randomized clinical trial was carried out among 80 consenting patients with an indication for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy in the Urology division of [BLINDED FOR PEER REVIEW]. Eighty participants were each randomized to either of Group A (CB with 10 ml of 2% lidocaine) or Group B (PPNB with a total of 20 ml of 1% lidocaine). Pain was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS), and questions on satisfaction with the procedure and willingness for a repeat procedure were asked. The incidence of complications was also recorded.

Results

There were no significant differences in the mean ages, body mass indices (BMIs), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, digital rectal examination (DRE) findings and prostate sizes between the two groups. The mean NRS scores at administration of block, insertion of TRUS probe, prostate biopsy, 30 min and 1 day after biopsy were 2.9 ± 2.3, 2.1 ± 2.2, 3.1 ± 2.6, 1.4 ± 2.2 and 0.2 ± 0.4 respectively for CB and 3.1 ± 2.2, 2.3 ± 1.2, 2.8 ± 2.7, 1.4 ± 1.7 and 0.3 ± 0.5, respectively, for the PPNB group. There were no significant differences between the mean scores in both groups. There were also no statistically significant differences in the incidences of complications in both groups.

Conclusion

The two methods of analgesia are similar in efficacy and are equally safe to employ in the performance of TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Both methods can be learned to increase the repertoire of the urologist when faced with a TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Trial registration

PACTR, PACTR202012779661309. Registered 11th December 2020—Retrospectively registered, https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID=14564.

Does deep sedation with analgesia have positive effects on anxiety, pain and compliance in patients before and after prostate biopsy?

AIMS

To investigate whether deep sedation for transrectal prostate biopsy could reduce anxiety and pain and enhance rebiopsy compliance.

METHODS

A two-centre prospective observation study was conducted under two different anaesthetic conditions: deep sedation with analgesia and local anaesthesia with lidocaine. A 12-core prostate biopsy was taken in all patients. Scores on a 0-10 visual analogue scale, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-X-1, the Beck Anxiety Inventory and a five-level Likert satisfaction scale were evaluated. Finally, all patients were asked about their willingness to undergo the same procedure again if necessary and whether they wanted to change the anaesthetic method (deep sedation to local anaesthesia or local to sedation) if a repeat procedure was required.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included in this study, including 69 patients in the sedation group and 66 patients in the local group. Lower pain scores (P < .001) and higher satisfaction scores (P = .019) were observed in the sedation group than in the local group after the procedure. Anxiety scores in the sedation group were significantly decreased after the procedure, whereas those were not changed in the local group. The question regarding rebiopsy compliance tended to be more positive in the sedation than in the local group (73.9% vs 62.1%, respectively, P = .099). The proportion of patients who wanted to change their anaesthetic method was much higher in the local than in the sedation group (68.2% vs 11.6%, respectively, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Deep sedation with analgesia during transrectal prostate biopsy could reduce pain and postprocedural anxiety and enhance rebiopsy compliance. Considering the psychological and oncological benefits, we strongly recommend inducing deep sedation during transrectal prostate biopsy.

Comparing use of lidocaine periprostatic nerve block and diclofenac suppository alone for patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy

Introduction

The objective of this study is to make a comparison between the effectiveness of the diclo- fenac suppository alone and periprostatic local anaesthesia infiltration alone to reduce the pain during a transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy procedure.

Material and methods

Between January 2014 and December 2015, 100 patients from two centres who were scheduled for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUS Bx) were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups; diclofenac suppository group (Group 1) and Lidocaine group (Group 2). After the prostate biopsy, patients were requested to fill out a visual analogue scale in order to evaluate their pain level during the procedure.

RESULTS

Since each group had been examined for VAS score, statistical differences were detected for VAS 0 and VAS 1. VAS 0 score was stated in 38 (71%) patients in Group 2, and in 25 (50%) patients in Group 1 (p = 0.040). VAS 1 score was stated in 9 (17%) patients in group 2 and 19 (38%) patients in Group 1 (p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

Although statistical difference was detected at lower VAS scores (0 and 1) in favor of the lidocaine group during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies, there was not a significant difference in higher (>2) VAS scores; which was made with 100 mg of diclofenac suppository. Therefore, diclofenac suppository can be used as an alternative to periprostatic nerve block made with lidocaine.

Which is better for pain reduction during transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: Intravenous diazepam, local periprostatic nerve block, or combination? controlled randomized study

Background:

Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB) is considered the procedure of choice for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Men undergoing this biopsy experience high psychological stress. Different studies recommend techniques as sedation, lidocaine gel intrarectally, periprostatic nerve block alone, or nitrous oxide inhalation as effective methods of analgesia during procedural-related pain or discomfort. We evaluated three techniques for pain relief during TRUSPB and evaluated if there was any increase in the incidence of complications when employing either technique.

Setting:

Assiut University Hospital, Assiut, Egypt.

Methods:

Three hundred patients of age 43–92-year-old underwent TRUSPBs. Patients were allocated randomly into three equal groups to receive intravenous (IV) diazepam 5 mg slowly (Group I), bilateral periprostatic nerve block by 10 ml of 1% lidocaine solution injected under ultrasound guidance (Group II), or combined IV diazepam and the periprostatic nerve block (Group III).

Results:

The mean pain score was 4.95 for patients in Group I, 4.15 for patients in Group II, and 2.18 for patients in Group III with statistically significant findings (F = 120.27, P < 0.001). TRUSPB under combined IV sedation and local anesthesia had no significant increase in the incidence of complications.

Conclusions:

Patients should have analgesia during TRUSPB to decrease the procedure pain and to improve tolerance permitting proper aiming for biopsy cores without increasing the patient distress. The combined IV sedation and local periprostatic nerve block are efficient in controlling and limiting pain better than employing each technique alone with no significant increase in complications incidence.

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.

Analysis of topographical distribution of prostate cancer and related pathological findings in prostatectomy specimens using cMDX document architecture

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the topographical distribution of prostate cancer (PCa) foci is necessary to optimize the biopsy strategy. This study was done to develop a technical approach that facilitates the analysis of the topographical distribution of PCa foci and related pathological findings (i.e., Gleason score and foci dimensions) in prostatectomy specimens.

MATERIAL & METHODS

The topographical distribution of PCa foci and related pathologic evaluations were documented using the cMDX documentation system. The project was performed in three steps. First, we analyzed the document architecture of cMDX, including textual and graphical information. Second, we developed a data model supporting the topographic analysis of PCa foci and related pathologic parameters. Finally, we retrospectively evaluated the analysis model in 168 consecutive prostatectomy specimens of men diagnosed with PCa who underwent total prostate removal. The distribution of PCa foci were analyzed and visualized in a heat map. The color depth of the heat map was reduced to 6 colors representing the PCa foci frequencies, using an image posterization effect. We randomly defined 9 regions in which the frequency of PCa foci and related pathologic findings were estimated.

RESULTS

Evaluation of the spatial distribution of tumor foci according to Gleason score was enabled by using a filter function for the score, as defined by the user. PCa foci with Gleason score (Gls) 6 were identified in 67.3% of the patients, of which 55 (48.2%) also had PCa foci with Gls between 7 and 10. Of 1173 PCa foci, 557 had Gls 6, whereas 616 PCa foci had Gls>6. PCa foci with Gls 6 were mostly concentrated in the posterior part of the peripheral zone of the prostate, whereas PCa foci with Gls>6 extended toward the basal and anterior parts of the prostate. The mean size of PCa foci with Gls 6 was significantly lower than that of PCa with Gls>6 (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The cMDX-based technical approach facilitates analysis of the topographical distribution of PCa foci and related pathologic findings in prostatectomy specimens.

Intravenous paracetamol for relief of pain during transrectal-ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Transrectal-ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PBx) is the standard procedure for diagnosing prostate cancer. The procedure does cause some pain and discomfort; therefore, an adequate analgesia is necessary to ensure patient comfort, which can also facilitate good-quality results. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study aimed to determine if intravenous (IV) paracetamol can reduce the severity of pain associated with TRUS-PBx. The study included 104 patients, scheduled to undergo TRUS-PBx with a suspicion of prostate cancer, that were prospectively randomized to receive either IV paracetamol (paracetamol group) or placebo (placebo group) 30 minutes prior to TRUS-PBx. All patients had 12 standardized biopsy samples taken. Pain was measured using a 10-point visual analog pain scale during probe insertion, during the biopsy procedure, and 1 hour postbiopsy. All biopsies were performed by the same urologist, whereas a different urologist administered the visual analog pain scale. There were not any significant differences in age, prostate-specific antigen level, or prostate volume between the two groups. The pain scores were significantly lower during probe insertion, biopsy procedure, and 1 hour postbiopsy in the paracetamol group than in the placebo group. In conclusion, the IV administration of paracetamol significantly reduced the severity of pain associated with TRUS-PBx.

Combination of Tramadol and Lidocaine for Pain Control During Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy: A Randomized Double-blinded Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of tramadol, lidocaine, and a combination of tramadol with lidocaine in pain relief using periprostatic nerve block technique by guidance of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) before the prostate biopsy (PBx).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For the indication of TRUS-PBx, the patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level >4.0 ng/mL or abnormal digital examination findings were selected. The patients were randomized through random method. Group 1: patients were administered 5 mL of 2% lidocaine; group 2: patients were administered 5 mL of 25-mg tramadol; and group 3: patients were administered 5 mL of 2% lidocaine + 25-mg tramadol. The procedures were completed in 10 minutes, and a visual pain scale was administered to the patients to question the pain severity.

RESULTS

TRUS-guided PBx was performed in 60 patients with an age range of 57-77 years (mean age, 66.2 ± 7.49 years) and a PSA range of 1-1000 ng/mL. The mean PSA level of the groups was 28.5 (±7.5), 16.1 (±5.0), and 14.9 (±2.9) ng/mL, respectively. The postprocedural pain scores by visual pain scale were 4.6 ± 1.2, 5.4 ± 1.2, and 3.6 ± 0.9 in lidocaine, tramadol, and lidocaine + tramadol groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Periprostatic nerve block is the current golden standard method owing to pain management and comfort provided, independent of the patient age and the number of core biopsies. We suggest that tramadol may also be used in this field to achieve better pain management by improving lidocaine's effect or as an alternative to lidocaine.

Three different anesthesia techniques for a comfortable prostate biopsy

Aim:

In this paper, we aimed to compare the efficacy of three different anesthesia techniques applied in 90 cases of which transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) -guided prostate biopsies were taken.

Materials and Methods:

Between February 2012 and July 2012, TRUS-guided 16 core biopsies were taken from 90 patients who comply the study criteria. Patients were randomly divided into three groups each of which consists of 30 individuals. Group 1: Was applied periprostatic block anesthesia; Group 2: Was administered intrarectal lidocaine gel; Group 3: Was applied pudendal block. Visual analog scale (VAS) of patients in groups was evaluated.

Results:

There was no statistically significant difference between the mean ages, prostate-specific antigen values of three groups. Although pain ratings of Groups 2 and 3 were high, no significant difference was present between each other (P > 0.05). In Groups 1 and 2, the difference between VASs was significant. In the group where periprostatic block was applied, pain ratings were significantly low compared with the other two groups (P = 0.0001).

Discussion:

Enabling pain and discomfort control in patients is very important during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. In our study, we observed that the periprostatic block enables more comfortable compared with patient groups with intrarectal lidocaine gel and pudendal block and better reduction in pain scores.

Intrarectal Lidocaine-Diltiazem-Meperidine Gel for Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy

Background:

TRUS-guided needle biopsy of the prostate gland is the current standard method used for diagnosis of prostate cancer. Pain control during this procedure is through the use of i.v. sedation or local anaesthetic (LA), depending on clinician preference.

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of intrarectal lidocaine, lidocaine-diltiazem and lidocaine-meperidine-diltiazem gel for anesthetizing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

Patients and Methods:

In a randomized double-blind clinical trial, 100 consecutive patients were divided into three groups. The patients received one of the gels before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: group A, intrarectal and perianal lidocaine, gel 1 g; group B, intrarectal lidocaine gel, 1 g, + perianal diltiazem, 1 g; group C, intrarectal lidocaine gel, 1 g, + meperidine, 25 mg, and perianal diltiazem, 1 g. Visual analog pain scale was used to estimate pain during probe insertion and biopsy. Heart rate and blood pressure during probe insertion and biopsy were recorded too.

Results:

The mean of visual analog pain scale was 4.5 in group A, 3.5 in group B, and 2.0 in group C during probe insertion (P value = 0.01). The mean of visual analog pain scale was 5.1 in group A, 3.5 group B, and 2.5 in group C during biopsy (P value = 0.001). The groups were comparable for patients' age, weight, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and prostate size (P > 0.05). No side effects of meperidine and lidocaine including drowsiness, dizziness, tinnitus and light-headedness or requiring assistance for activity were noted.

Conclusions:

Lidocaine-meperidine-diltiazem gel provides significantly better pain control than lidocaine-diltiazem gel and lidocaine gel alone during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy and probe insertion. This mixture gel is safe, easy to administer and well accepted by patients.

Intrarectal ice application prior to transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective randomised trial accessing pain and collateral effects

Objectives

To analyze the efficacy of intrarectal ice application as an anesthetic method prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy.

Materials and Methods

A total of 120 consecutive men were included into the study prospectively. Patients were equally randomized as group 1 and 2 with 60 patients each. Ice was applied as an anesthetic method 5 minutes before procedure to the patients in group 1. Patients in group 2 were applied 10 ml of 2% lidocaine gel 10 minutes before procedure. Twelve core biopsy procedure was performed for all patients. The pain level was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS).

Results

Median pain score was 3.5 (1-8) in group 1 and 5 (1-8) in group 2. There is significantly difference between groups regarding the mean sense of pain level during the procedure. (p=0.007) There was also no difference in complications between two groups about presence and duration of macroscopic hematuria and rectal bleeding.

Conclusions

Intrarectal ice application prior to TRUS prostate biopsy has an effect on reducing pain. Development of new techniques about cold effect or ice can make this method more useful and decrease complication rates.

Role of PCA3 test in clinical decision making for prostate cancer diagnosis

AIM: To assess the role of PCA3 urine test in the management of patients with suspected prostate cancer after repeat negative prostate biopsies.

METHODS: Patients with suspected prostate cancer either due to high or rising prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels and with a history of prostate biopsy who were candidates for repeat procedure were prospectively recruited to undergo PCA3 urine test. The recommendations on further management including the decision whether to proceed or not to the biopsy were made based on the PCA3 score. Patients’ adherence with the recommendations and influence of the PCA3 test on clinical decision making were assessed. The contribution of the multivariate model was measured with a decision curve analysis.

RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-six patients were recruited to the study and underwent the PCA3 test. Twenty-six percent of 263 patients underwent prostate biopsy despite the low risk designation by PCA3 and 30% of 93 men did not proceed to biopsy despite a high risk result, rendering overall adherence of 73%. The variables that significantly correlated with adherence were positive family history of prostate cancer and PSA more than 10 ng/mL. Pre-test clinical stage, the number and the results of previous biopsies were not associated with the adherence. The decision curve analysis gave identical results for cut-off points of 25 and 35. On multivariate analysis the model that included PCA3 score, serum PSA, family history and result of the previous biopsy best performed with Area Under the Curve of 0.77.

CONCLUSION: PCA3 urine test markedly outperforms PSA in a repeat biopsy setting. Urologists and patients demonstrate substantial confidence in this analysis and tend to follow its recommendations.

Identifying the variables associated with pain during transrectal ultrasonography of the prostate

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to prospectively investigate the degree of pain experienced by the patients receiving transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) of the prostate by applying a visual analog scale. We also identified the clinical parameters influencing pain during the TRUS examination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Records were obtained from a prospective database for male patients who received TRUS of prostate in the outpatient department of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, from January 2014 to June 2014. The patients underwent a detailed physical examination and medical history review. Immediately after the TRUS examination, the patients completed questionnaires based on a ten-point visual analog pain scale. The variables of interest were age, body mass index, prostate volume, prostate sagittal length, prostate-specific antigen, previous TRUS experience, external hemorrhoids, anal surgical history, prostate calcification, and image artifact caused by stool in the rectum. All variables were correlated to the visual analog scale by applying multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

By using linear regression analysis, we identified the independent factors that affected the pain score during the TRUS examination. The patients who received the examination for the first time or had longer prostate sagittal lengths, external hemorrhoids, anal surgical history, or stool stored in the rectum experienced more pain during the TRUS examination. Furthermore, the pain was reduced when we provided the patients with a detailed explanation before the procedure and allowed them to observe the real-time images during the examination.

CONCLUSION

Although a TRUS examination is uncomfortable for patients, after having identified the factors affecting pain, physicians can assist patients in reducing pain during the procedure, thus providing higher quality examinations.

Pain during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and the role of periprostatic nerve block: what radiologists should know

Early prostate cancers are best detected with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided core biopsy of the prostate. Due to increased longevity and improved prostate cancer screening, more men are now subjected to TRUS-guided biopsy. To improve the detection rate of early prostate cancer, the current trend is to increase the number of cores obtained. The significant pain associated with the biopsy procedure is usually neglected in clinical practice. Although it is currently underutilized, the periprostatic nerve block is an effective technique to mitigate pain associated with prostate biopsy. This article reviews contemporary issues pertaining to pain during prostate biopsy and discusses the practical aspects of periprostatic nerve block.

[The local anesthesia for the prostatic biopsies echo-guided: forward-looking randomized study comparing two methods]

INTRODUCTION

The realization of the prostatic biopsies is a painful act. The objective of our work was to compare the analgesic efficiency of the injection of the lidocaine at the level of periprostatics laterals and apical areas compared with the use of gel of lidocaine intrarectal associated with the taking of oral tramadol.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between November 2007 and December 2009, 60 patients admitted in the service of urology of the university hospital Mohammed VI of Marrakesh for prostatic biopsies were randomized in two groups. The group 1 (30 patients) received two tablets from tramadol 50mg with 10 mL of gel of lidocaine 2% intrarectal while 30 patients of the group 2 received 10 mL from lidocaine 2% injected at the level of periprostatics laterals and apicales. The pain was estimated by a visual analog scale (AVS) at the introduction of the probe of echography (AVS 1), at the time of the biopsy (AVS 2) and 20 minutes later (AVS 3).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between both groups concerning AVS 1 means. The average score of the pain was significantly lower in the group 2 for the AVS 2 and AVS 3.

CONCLUSION

The periprostatics anesthesia assured a better control of the pain at the time of the prostatic biopsy and 20 minutes later, without increase of the complications. We recommend it to decrease the pain and the discomfort related to this technique.

Transrectal prostate biopsy

Grayscale transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy using local anesthesia remains the standard approach to the definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer. Careful patient evaluation and preparation are essential to maximize the results and minimize the complications of the biopsy procedure.

Does Periprostatic Block Increase the Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS) Biopsy Sepsis Rate in Men with Elevated PSA?

Introduction: Periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) is a common local anaesthetic technique in transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy, but concerns remain over the increased theoretical risks of urinary tract infection (UTI) and sepsis from the additional transrectal needle punctures. This study reviewed our biopsy data to assess this risk. Materials and Methods: Retrospective data collected from 177 men who underwent TRUS biopsy between July 2007 and December 2009 in a single institution were analysed. PPNB was administered using 1% xylocaine at the prostatic base and apex and repeated on the contralateral side under ultrasound guidance. Complications, including UTI sepsis, bleeding per rectum and acute retention of urine (ARU) were noted. Every patient was tracked for the first 2 weeks for complications until his clinic review. Demographic profile, biopsy parameters and histological findings were reviewed. Univariate and multivariate analysis of possible risk factors for development of sepsis after TRUS biopsy were performed. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 17.0. Results: Ninety (51%) men received PPNB and 87 (49%) did not. The groups were matched in age (PPNB: mean 62.7 ± 5.8 years; without PPNB: mean 64.4 ± 5.7 years) and prebiopsy prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels (PPNB: mean 8.2 ± 3.9 ng/mL; without PPNB: mean 8.3 ± 3.7 ng/mL). The PPNB group had a larger prostate volume, with more cores taken (P <0.05). On univariate and multivariate analysis controlling for age, PSA, prostate volume, number of cores taken and histological prostatitis, PPNB was not a significant risk factor for sepsis. Sepsis rates were 5.6% in the PPNB group and 5.7% in the other group (P = 0.956). Overall prostate cancer detection rate was 33.3%. Conclusion: The risk of sepsis was not increased in patients who received PPNB, even though this group had larger gland volumes and more biopsy cores taken. Key words: Periprostatic nerve block (PPNB), Sepsis, Transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy

The 'green whistle': a novel method of analgesia for transrectal prostate biopsy

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• Patients undergoing TRUS-guided biopsies were each given a Penthrox inhaler to self-administer during the procedure and instructed in its use. • Immediately after the procedure, patients were asked to rate their pain using a verbal rating scale from 0 to 10.

RESULTS

• In all, 42 consecutive men underwent a TRUS-guided biopsy. • The median pain score was 3. • All 42 patients stated they would be happy to undergo the same procedure again. The only adverse effects reported by patients were brief light-headedness and a sickly sweet taste.

CONCLUSION

• This study of our initial experience using Penthrox suggests that it may have a role in analgesia for TRUS-guided biopsy. • It may provide safe, adequate analgesia that is easy for urologists to use and avoids excessive use of resources. • Planning for a randomised control trial comparing Penthrox to the current 'gold standard' of prostatic infiltration of local anaesthetic is presently underway.

Applications of transrectal ultrasound in prostate cancer

Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) was first developed in the 1970s. TRUS-guided biopsy, under local anaesthetic and prophylactic antibiotics, is now the most widely accepted method to diagnose prostate cancer. However, the sensitivity and specificity of greyscale TRUS in the detection of prostate cancer is low. Prostate cancer most commonly appears as a hypoechoic focal lesion in the peripheral zone on TRUS but the appearances are variable with considerable overlap with benign lesions. Because of the low accuracy of greyscale TRUS, TRUS-guided biopsies have become established in the acquisition of systematic biopsies from standard locations. The number of systematic biopsies has increased over the years, with 10-12 cores currently accepted as the minimum standard. This article describes the technique of TRUS and biopsy and its complications. Novel modalities including contrast-enhanced modes and elastography as well as fusion techniques for increasing the sensitivity of TRUS-guided prostate-targeted biopsies are discussed along with their role in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer.

Are joint and soft tissue injections painful? Results of a national French cross-sectional study of procedural pain in rheumatological practice

BACKGROUND

Joint, spinal and soft tissue injections are commonly performed by rheumatologists in their daily practice. Contrary to other procedures, e.g. performed in pediatric care, little is known about the frequency, the intensity and the management of procedural pain observed in osteo-articular injections in daily practice.

METHODS

This observational, prospective, national study was carried out among a French national representative database of primary rheumatologists to evaluate the prevalence and intensity of pain caused by intra-and peri-articular injections, synovial fluid aspirations, soft tissue injections, and spinal injections. For each physician, data were collected over 1 month, for up to 40 consecutive patients (>18-years-old) for whom a synovial fluid aspiration, an intra or peri-articular injection or a spinal injection were carried out during consultations. Statistical analysis was carried out in order to compare patients who had suffered from pain whilst undergoing the procedure to those who had not. Explanatory analyses were conducted by stepwise logistic regression with the characteristics of the patients to explain the existence of pain.

RESULTS

Data were analysed for 8446 patients (64% female, mean age 62 +/- 14 years) recruited by 240 physicians. The predominant sites injected were the knee (45.5%) and spine (19.1%). Over 80% of patients experienced procedural pain which was most common in the small joints (42%) and spine (32%) Pain was severe in 5.3% of patients, moderate in 26.6%, mild in 49.8%, and absent in 18.3%. Pain was significantly more intense in patients with severe pain linked to their underlying pathology and for procedures performed in small joints.Preventative or post-procedure analgesia was rarely given, only to 5.7% and 36.3% of patients, respectively. Preventative analgesia was more frequently prescribed in patients with more severe procedural pain.

CONCLUSION

Most patients undergoing intra-or peri-articular injections, synovial fluid aspirations and spine injections suffer from procedural pain. Most patients experience usually mild procedural pain and procedural pain management is uncommonly provided by physicians. Specific research and guidelines for the management of procedural pain related to rheumatologic care should be established to improve the quality of care provided by physicians.

Interventional uroradiology

With advances in imaging capabilities and percutaneous instruments, many urologic diseases that were once managed surgically are now managed with minimally invasive image-guided techniques. Interventional uroradiology has evolved from simple renal biopsies for diagnostic confirmation, to percutaneous management of stones, to ablation of renal and adrenal tumors. Central to this evolution is the close cooperation with the urologist and nephrologist, each of whom provides specific skill sets and knowledge that can be used to successfully manage the patient. The purpose of this article is to detail the wide range of image-guided interventional techniques, including a discussion of indications, methods, success rates, and complications.

Topical Prilocaine-Lidocaine Cream Combined with Peripheral Nerve Block Improves Pain Control in Prostatic Biopsy: Results from a Prospective Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare pain control results between periprostatic nerve block alone and combined with topical prilocaine-lidocaine cream as local anesthesia of prostate biopsy.

METHODS

Three hundred patients were randomized to receive PNB (group 1), topical anesthesia of the anal ring, anal canal, and anterior rectal wall combined with PNB (group 2) and placebo (group 3). Patients were asked to use scale of 0-10 to complete a visual analogue scale questionnaire about pain during probe insertion (VAS1), periprostatic infiltration (VAS2), and cores (VAS3).

RESULTS

Pain during probe insertion in group 2 was significantly less than in groups 1 and 3 (VAS1, 0.29 vs. 1.46 and 1.48; p<0.0001). Pain during periprostatic infiltration was also reduced in group 2 compared with group 1 (VAS2, 1.06 vs. 2.39; p<0.0001). Pain control was similar during biopsy in the PNB and combined groups (VAS3, 0.43 vs. 0.37; p=0.77) and was superior to group 3 (VAS3, 3.02; p<0.0001). In younger patients (cut off, median age 67 yr) these differences were still significant between groups 1 and 2 (VAS1, 1.95 vs.0.31; p<0.0001 and VAS2, 2.97 vs. 1,15; p<0.0001), but not in older patients (VAS1, 0.91 vs. 0.28; p=0.06; VAS2, 1.52 vs. 0,92; p=0.06). Vagal symptoms were registered in 36 (12%) patients in all groups. Sepsis occurred in one group 1 patient and in one group 2 patient. Rectal bleeding was observed in one group 2 patient.

CONCLUSION

Combined prilocaine-lidocaine cream topically placed with PNB is superior to PNB alone and may be of maximum benefit for younger patients.

[Prostate biopsy strategies. A review of the literature]

INTRODUCTION

In 1987 transrectal ultrasound was described like the technique for guiding prostate biopsy. Since that time different options of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy were described.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We did a reviewed of the different techniques and cores distribution in the prostate biopsy, also we describes the patient preparation and the most important complications.

RESULTS

The majority of the reviewed showed an increase in the sensibility rates with the extended transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies. These improvements generally are due to the most lateral zones.

CONCLUSION

Until now, due to a great experience and a low complications rate, the transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy strategy should be extended respect the classical sextant biopsy with cores from the most lateral zones of the prostate.

Complications and limitations related to periprostatic local anesthesia before TRUS-guided prostate biopsy

PURPOSE

To assess the frequency of complications specifically related to local anesthetic infiltration prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS

A total of 200 patients receiving 10 cm(3) (5 cm(3) on each side) of 2% lidocaine injected around the periprostatic nerve plexus under TRUS guidance before prostate biopsy were included. Various complications presumed to be associated with local anesthesia were noted during and after the biopsy procedure. Two weeks later, periprostatic tissue integrity and vascularization were re-examined with TRUS Doppler examination to assess for fibrosis or infection.

RESULTS

The most common finding was pain due to puncture with the needle used for local anesthesia (27%). Also recorded were the need for repeated injections during the biopsy procedure (4.5%), symptoms associated with systemic lidocaine toxicity (2%), urinary incontinence (1.5%), and degradation of the image resolution due to anesthetic injection (1%). Increased vascularization within the periprostatic region was uncommon (2%) on the 2-week follow-up examination. No TRUS finding consistent with rectal wall hematoma or other periprostatic change and no erectile dysfunction associated with the procedure occurred. There was a significant difference in overall pain scores between the subgroups of patients (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TRUS-guided periprostatic nerve blockade is an effective method for relieving discomfort from prostate biopsy with very few complications.

Extended and saturation prostatic biopsy in the diagnosis and characterisation of prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To review and critically analyse all the recent literature on the detection and characterisation of prostate cancer by means of extended and saturation protocols.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching MedLine from January 1995 to April 2007. Electronic searches were limited to the English language, and the key words "prostate cancer," "diagnosis," "transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)," "prostate biopsy," and "prognosis" were used.

RESULTS

The prostate biopsy technique has changed significantly since the original Hodge sextant biopsy protocol. Several types of local anaesthesia are now available, but periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) has proved to be the most effective method to reduce pain during TRUS biopsy. It remains controversial whether PPNB should be associated with other medications. The optimal extended protocol (sextant template with at least four additional cores) should include six standard sextant biopsies, with additional biopsies (up to 12 cores) taken more laterally (anterior horn) to the base and medially to the apex. Repeat biopsies should be based on saturation biopsies (number of cores >/= 20) and should include the transition zone, especially in a patient with an initial negative biopsy. As a means of increasing accuracy of prostatic biopsy and reducing unnecessary prostate biopsy, colour and power Doppler imaging, with or without contrast enhancement, and elastography now can be successfully adopted, but their routine use is still controversial.

CONCLUSION

Extended and saturation biopsy schemes should be performed at first and repeat biopsy, respectively. The widespread use of local anaesthesia makes the procedures more comfortable.

Caudal block anesthesia for transrectal prostate biopsy

OBJECTIVE

Transrectal prostate biopsy is a potentially painful procedure. Our service has significant experience with caudal anesthesia for perianal procedures. This study is aimed to determine the effectiveness of caudal anesthesia for transrectal prostate biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy consecutive patients undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy were entered into the study. The patients were requested to complete a questionnaire structured to assess the pain felt during the procedure using the visual analog score (VAS). The effectiveness of the caudal anesthesia was determined by the anesthesia of the perineum and the laxity of the anal sphincter. Complications from the procedures were recorded.

RESULTS

All the patients completed and returned the questionnaire. The average age of the respondents is 65.8 years. Among the 34 patients with caudal block, effective anesthesia was achieved in 28 patients and ineffective in six patients. However, the mean VAS for the pain from transrectal prostate biopsy was 1.49 +/- 1.93 SD (range 0-6.0) for the patients with effective caudal anesthesia and 8.02 +/- 1.79 SD (range 5.0-10.0) for patients with no caudal anesthesia. There was a reduced requirement for analgesics after prostate biopsy for patients with effective caudal anesthesia. Three patients (8.8%) had minor complications (transient dizziness) following the injection of the anesthetic into the caudal epidural space.

CONCLUSION

Satisfactory analgesia for transrectal prostate biopsy can be achieved with the use of CA and it results in better cooperation of the patient during the procedure.

[Comparison of the use of local anaesthetic versus lidocaine injection under ultrasound guide for the pain control in patients undergoing prostate biopsy]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the lidocaine gel's application effect versus the periprostatic placement of lidocaine to manage the pain in patients who go through a prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

We took the patients who entered the FCI-IC to effectuate a prostate biopsy with an echographic guideline. The patients were split in two groups of 22 people with each one bearing similar characteristics. One of these groups experimented the previous prostate biopsy with 10cc of intrarectal lidocaine gel and the other group experimented 10 cc of lidocaine to 1% in the vesic-prostatic through echographic guidelines. To evaluate the pain, we used the visual analogue scale to gauge the pain during and after the procedure in both groups. The daily procedure to do biopsies by octants and their subsequent preparation remained the same and never changed.

RESULTS

The average scale of pain during the procedure was 2.0 for the group with injected anaesthesia and 4.77 for the group who used gel. After the procedure the average of pain was 0.77 and 3.14 respectively. Some complications as bacteremy were present in 3 patients (6.8%) of the total, who were in the gel group and none were found in the group of injected anestesia. No significant relation was found with respect to other variables.

CONCLUSIONS

the application of periprostatic lidocaine is efficient to control the pain in patients who go through a prostate biopsy. Besides, it is a safe procedure which can be easily reproduce in our environment.

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

This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) and intrarectal local anesthestic (IRLA) gel in alleviating pain during prostate biopsy. Electronic databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing PPNB with periprostatic placebo injection, no injection or with IRLA. Studies for inclusion were identified and extracted by two authors independently. The main outcome measure was patients' assessment of mean pain scores on a 10-point scale at the end of the biopsy procedure. Secondary outcomes were complications and adverse events. Continuous data from the trials were combined by calculating the weighted mean difference (WMD) with its 95% confidence interval. In total, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty studies involving 1685 patients compared PPNB with either no anesthesia or with placebo injection controls, showing a significant reduction in pain score in the anesthetic group (WMD -2.09, 95% CI -2.44 to -1.75, P<0.00001). Five studies with 466 patients compared IRLA and control. Although IRLA was associated with pain reduction, the effect size was not statistically significant (WMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.12). Six studies with 872 patients compared PPNB with IRLA, showing a significant pain reduction in the former group (WMD -1.53, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.39, P=0.008). No trials reported an increase in complications in the treatment arms. In conclusion, the evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that local anesthetic given as a PPNB, but not as an intrarectal instillation, is effective and safe in alleviating pain from transrectal ultrasound biopsy of the prostate.

Combined “periprostatic and periapical” local anesthesia is not superior to “periprostatic” anesthesia alone in reducing pain during Tru-Cut prostate biopsy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate, in a prospective study, the benefit of adding local periapical prostatic anesthesia to routine periprostatic infiltration to the prostate-seminal vesicle junction in a randomized fashion. Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy is the reference standard in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Although well tolerated by most patients, it can be associated with discomfort.

METHODS

A total of 120 consecutive evaluable patients with an elevated total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA) level, increased tPSA velocity, and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings were enrolled. The patients were randomized into two groups. Group 1 received periprostatic infiltration of 6 mL 1% lidocaine. Group 2 received periprostatic and apical infiltration: 4 mL 1% lidocaine at the prostate-seminal vesicle junction and 2-mL infiltration at the prostatic apex 15 minutes before transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Pain was assessed using a 10-point modified visual analog scale.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 63.7 +/- 1.2 years and 64.2 +/- 1.1 years, the mean tPSA level was 12.1 +/- 1.5 ng/mL and 13.6 +/- 2.7 ng/mL, the mean biopsy duration was 6.2 +/- 2.5 minutes and 6.1 +/- 2.2 minutes, and the mean visual analog scale pain score was 1.26 +/- 0.1 and 1.23 +/- 0.1 for groups 1 and 2, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed with respect to age, tPSA level, mean biopsy duration, or pain score between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Periprostatic lidocaine infiltration provides local anesthesia that results in improved visual analog scale pain scores. Additional apical infiltration did not improve patient discomfort further. However, comparative evidence has indicated that increasing the time elapsed between the anesthetic infiltration and the biopsy procedure may further improve pain control.

Efficacy compared between caudal block and periprostatic local anesthesia for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical efficacy of a caudal block compared with periprostatic local anesthesia for transrectal ultrasound-guided multicore prostate needle biopsy.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients who had undergone initial prostate biopsy using a systematic five-region biopsy by a single operator were investigated. The patients were randomly divided into two groups, with each group receiving a different anesthetic modality before biopsy. Group 1 received periprostatic local anesthesia and group 2 received a caudal block. Both groups received 10 mL 1% lidocaine before biopsy. A 10-point visual analog scale was used to assess patient pain and anxiety. The duration between anesthesia induction and the beginning of the biopsy was measured.

RESULTS

Patients who received local anesthesia (group 1) reported significantly less pain immediately after biopsy, with an average score of 1.1 compared with 2.1 in group 2 (caudal block, P = 0.01). Both groups were comparable regarding age, prostate-specific antigen level, digital rectal examination findings, prostate size, number of biopsy cores, level of prebiopsy anxiety, body mass index, and histologic findings. Group 1 required a significantly shorter period of anesthesia (198.5 seconds) than did group 2 (594.5 seconds, P <0.0001). No anesthetic-related side effects occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study have shown that the caudal block provides less effective anesthesia than periprostatic local anesthesia with the same dose of lidocaine for prostate biopsy. We have concluded that local anesthesia is a safe, simple, and rapid method of pain relief during prostate biopsy.

Lidocaine–Prilocaine Administration during Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostatic Biopsy: A Randomized, Single-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

As many as 96% of patients report some kind of discomfort/pain during transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy, and when pain is severe, it may be necessary to decrease the planned number of biopsies or interrupt the procedure. Various modalities have been recommended to alleviate the pain, but reports on efficacy are contradictory. We assessed the possible benefit of intrarectal and perianal lidocaine-prilocaine (EMLA) cream.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A series of 98 patients without active anal and prostatic conditions underwent TRUS and, 10 to 31 days later, TRUS-guided biopsy. They were asked to grade their discomfort/pain using a 10- point linear visual analog pain scale (VAS). After TRUS, patients were divided into three groups on the basis of the VAS scores. Group 1 (N = 8) had pain scores <or=2 (mild pain/discomfort). Group 2 (N = 75) had pain scores between 2 and 5 (moderate pain/discomfort). Group 3 (N = 15) had pain scores >or=5 (severe pain/discomfort). Each group was then randomized to receive local anesthesia with intrarectal and anal EMLA cream (subgroup A) or intrarectal and anal ultrasound gel as placebo (subgroup B). Pain scoring was repeated after the biopsy.

RESULTS

In group 1, there were no significant differences in pain scores between subgroups A and B. In group 2, we could not complete the biopsy in one patient of subgroup B. A statistically significant difference was noticed between the VAS scores of subgroup A and subgroup B (P < 0.0001). In group 3, we were not able to complete biopsy in 5 patients of subgroup B. We noticed significantly higher VAS scores in subgroup B between TRUS and prostate biopsy (P < 0.0001), whereas similar scores were observed in subgroup A (P = NS). A statistically significant difference (P < 0.0001) was noticed between subgroup A and subgroup B scores during biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with high tolerance for simple TRUS, needle trauma does not significantly alter tolerability, and anesthetic provides little benefit for prostatic biopsy. However, the opposite is true in patients presenting moderate to significant pain/discomfort at TRUS, who may benefit from intrarectal/anal administration of EMLA during prostate biopsy.

Efficacy of periprostatic local anesthetic for prostate biopsy analgesia: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To perform a meta-analysis of available randomized trials investigating the analgesic efficacy of periprostatic block with local anesthetic.

METHODS

The National Library of Medicine's PubMed database was searched for the time period 1966 to August 16, 2005 for all relevant articles. Inclusion criteria included subjects undergoing prostate biopsy, trials that were randomized with one arm of the randomization using local anesthetic for periprostatic block before prostate biopsy, and where the assessment of biopsy pain was measured and available in a form compatible for statistical analysis in our meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Our search resulted in 107 abstracts, of which a total of 16 articles met all inclusion criteria. There were 660 subjects who received local anesthetics for a periprostatic block and 616 subjects who did not. The weighted mean difference between the groups indicates that subjects receiving local anesthetic periprostatic block would have a statistically lower pain score compared with those who did not (weighted mean difference in visual analogue pain of -1.66 [95% confidence interval -2.03 to -1.29]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests that periprostatic block with local anesthetic for prostate biopsy might result in significantly lower levels of pain during the biopsy procedure. Because periprostatic block with local anesthetic is relatively easy to administer and does not seem to be associated with increased morbidity, clinicians performing prostate biopsies should consider using this technique on a routine basis.

Contemporary issues in the diagnosis of prostate cancer for the radiologist

Prostate cancer diagnostic techniques have improved considerably in recent years, but they must yet be optimised to ensure cancer detection at a potentially curable stage. Arrangements for prostate biopsy vary throughout Europe, and prostate biopsy may be undertaken by urologists or radiologists. This review discusses current issues relevant for radiologists involved in the detection of early prostate cancer. Prostate biopsy should be based on a systematic approach involving 8-12 cores obtained with peri-prostatic infiltration of local anaesthetic. Quality issues being considered by the United Kingdom Prostate Cancer Risk Management Programme are discussed.

Current status of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer

In contemporary practice, most prostate cancers are either invisible on ultrasound or indistinguishable from concurrent benign prostatic hyperplasia. Diagnosis therefore rests on prostate biopsy. Biopsies are not simply directed at ultrasonically visible lesions, as these would miss many cancers; rather the whole gland is sampled. The sampling itself is systematic, using patterns based on prostate zonal anatomy and the geographical distribution and frequency of cancer. This review explains the evolution of the prostate biopsy technique, from the classical sextant biopsy method to the more recent extended biopsy protocols (8, 10, 12, >12 and saturation biopsy protocols). Extended protocols are increasingly being used to improve diagnostic accuracy, especially in those patients who require repeat biopsy. This trend has been facilitated by the ongoing improvement in safety and acceptability of the procedure, particularly with the use of antibiotic prophylaxis and local anaesthesia. The technical details of these extended protocols are discussed, as are the current data regarding procedure-related morbidity and how this may be minimized.

Site of local anaesthesia in transrectal ultrasonography-guided 12-core prostate biopsy: does it make a difference?

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively compare the efficacy of bi-basal vs bi-apical periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) during 12-core prostate biopsy guided by transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), and to evaluate the pain experienced on inserting the probe compared to the biopsy procedure, as PPNB with lignocaine local anaesthesia has been used for over a decade for minimizing pain during prostatic biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 143 men who were to have a TRUS-guided prostate biopsy were systematically randomized to two groups, to receive PPNB at the apex or base. A 10-cm visual analogue score was used to record the pain experienced during probe insertion, the biopsy and just before to leaving the department .

RESULTS

The mean pain score on biopsy in the apical group was similar to that of the basal group (apex 1.9, base 1.6, P = 0.36). Probe introduction produced a significantly higher pain score (probe 2.2, biopsy 1.7, P < 0.001) than at the biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who experienced greater pain with the introduction of the probe also reported more pain with the biopsy procedure. The site of local anaesthetic before prostatic biopsy showed no significant difference in pain scores. Older men tolerated the procedure better. Analgesia after PPNB at near either the apex or base appears equal, regardless of the site of injection. We suggest that topical perianal anaesthetic agents could significantly reduce not only pain perception, but also improve tolerance.