AIM: This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of intrarectal lidocaine gel versus periprostatic lidocaine injection during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. METHODS:Ninety men undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy from July through December 2004 were randomized into three groups of 30 patients each. Before the biopsy, patients in Group 1 received 20 mL of 2% lidocaine gel intrarectally; patients in Group 2 received 5 mL (2.5 mL per side) of 2% lidocaine solution injected near the junction of the seminal vesicle with the base of the prostate (along the neurovascular bundles), and patients in Group 3 (control group) received 5 mL (2.5 mL per side) of normal saline injected along the neurovascular bundles. Pain level after the biopsy was assessed using a 10-point linear visual analog scale (VAS). Results were statistically compared by the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. RESULTS: Patients in Group 2 had significantly lower VAS scores than those in Group 3 (3.6 +/- 2.1 vs 5.8 +/- 1.9, P < 0.0001), but those in Group 1 did not (5.5 +/- 2.7 vs 5.8 +/- 1.9, P = 0.67). Gross hematuria, rectal bleeding, and hemospermia occurred in 36 (40.0%), 6 (7%) and 5 (6%) patients. One patient had temporary vasovagal syncope. No patient reported febrile urinary tract infection or urinary retention. CONCLUSIONS:Periprostatic injection of local anaesthetic is a safe technique that significantly reduces pain during prostate biopsy, whereas intrarectal lidocaine injection did not reduce pain. This safe, simple technique should be applied in men undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy to limit patient discomfort.
RCT Entities:
AIM: This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of intrarectal lidocaine gel versus periprostatic lidocaine injection during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. METHODS: Ninety men undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy from July through December 2004 were randomized into three groups of 30 patients each. Before the biopsy, patients in Group 1 received 20 mL of 2% lidocaine gel intrarectally; patients in Group 2 received 5 mL (2.5 mL per side) of 2% lidocaine solution injected near the junction of the seminal vesicle with the base of the prostate (along the neurovascular bundles), and patients in Group 3 (control group) received 5 mL (2.5 mL per side) of normal saline injected along the neurovascular bundles. Pain level after the biopsy was assessed using a 10-point linear visual analog scale (VAS). Results were statistically compared by the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. RESULTS:Patients in Group 2 had significantly lower VAS scores than those in Group 3 (3.6 +/- 2.1 vs 5.8 +/- 1.9, P < 0.0001), but those in Group 1 did not (5.5 +/- 2.7 vs 5.8 +/- 1.9, P = 0.67). Gross hematuria, rectal bleeding, and hemospermia occurred in 36 (40.0%), 6 (7%) and 5 (6%) patients. One patient had temporary vasovagal syncope. No patient reported febrile urinary tract infection or urinary retention. CONCLUSIONS: Periprostatic injection of local anaesthetic is a safe technique that significantly reduces pain during prostate biopsy, whereas intrarectal lidocaine injection did not reduce pain. This safe, simple technique should be applied in men undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy to limit patient discomfort.
Authors: Christian Arsov; Robert Rabenalt; Michael Quentin; Andreas Hiester; Dirk Blondin; Peter Albers; Gerald Antoch; Lars Schimmöller Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-06-09 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: M Quentin; C Arsov; T Ullrich; B Valentin; A Hiester; D Blondin; P Albers; G Antoch; L Schimmöller Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Gregory T Chesnut; Piotr Zareba; Daniel D Sjoberg; Maha Mamoor; Sigrid Carlsson; Taehyoung Lee; Jonathan Fainberg; Emily Vertosick; Michael Manasia; Mary Schoen; Behfar Ehdaie Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2019-11-29 Impact factor: 1.862