The efficiency of a sedative or analgesic supplement to periprostatic nerve blockage for pain control during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy - a prospective, randomized, controlled, double blind study

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.

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.

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.

Pain related to cancer treatments and diagnostic procedures: a no man's land?

BACKGROUND

While guidelines are available for the management of cancer-related pain, little attention is given to the assessment and treatment of pain caused by treatments and diagnostic procedures in cancer patients.

METHODS

We evaluated the literature on pain related to cancer treatment and diagnostic procedures within a critical analysis.

RESULTS

The data available are sparse, suggesting that little attention has been directed at this important aspect of oncology. This points to potentially suboptimal patient management.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate studies are necessary in order to understand the incidence and appropriate management of pain, both during and/or after oncological treatments and diagnostic procedures. At the same time, Health Care Professionals should have heightened awareness of the causes and treatment of pain with the aim of anticipating and managing pain most appropriately for each individual patient. This is clearly an important component of holistic patient care before, during, and after oncological treatment.

Inhibitory effect of midazolam on MMP-9, MMP-1 and MMP-13 expression in PMA-stimulated human chondrocytes via recovery of NF-κB signaling

INTRODUCTION

Midazolam, a benzodiazepine, has a hypnotic effect and is widely used as an intravenous sedative. Past studies have clearly established that midazolam has beneficial effects in attenuating ischemia-reperfusion injury more than other currently used sedative drugs. However, the role of midazolam on chondroprotection via inhibition of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) is warrant investigation. The aim of this study was to examine the mechanisms of action of midazolam on MMP expression via nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) signaling in activated chondrosarcoma cells maintained in vitro.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Chondrocytes, SW1353 cells, were stimulated with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA) in the absence or presence of various concentrations of midazolam (5-20 µM). Release of MMP-9 into the culture media was determined by gelatin zymography. The expressions of MMP-1, MMP-9 and MMP-13, phosphorylation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), p38 mitogen-activated protein kinases and degradation of IκB-α were determined by western blotting assay.

RESULTS

Midazolam significantly down-regulated PMA-induced MMP-9 protein expression at concentrations of 5, 10 and 20 µM, the values were 1.95 ±0.09 (p < 0.01), 1.71 ±0.12 (p < 0.01) and 1.35 ±0.20 (p < 0.001), respectively. At concentrations of 5, 10 and 20 µM, it was significantly inhibited the PMA-induced expressions of MMP-1 (2.27 ±0.10, 1.98 ±0.11 and 1.56 ±0.15; p < 0.001) and MMP-13 (0.89 ±0.04, 0.81 ±0.07, and 0.74 ±0.09; p < 0.001), respectively. Midazolam at concentrations of 10 and 20 µM for 15 min significantly reversed the rate of degradation (0.895 ±0.051; p < 0.05 and 0.926 ±0.060; p < 0.01, respectively) of IκB-α in PMA-chondrocyte cells. In addition, this sedative drug inhibited PMA-induced levels of phos-ERK (1.243 ±0.12, 1.108 ±0.16 and 0.903 ±0.19, respectively) and phos-p38 (1.146 ±0.10, 1.063 ±0.13 and 0.946 ±0.18, at concentrations of (5, 10 and 20 µM), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These results are important for understanding the mechanism of midazolam in inhibiting PMA-induced MMP expression through the signaling pathways of either NF-κB or ERK/p38 MAPKs down-regulation.