OBJECTIVE: The study aims to review the current evidence to determine the efficiency and safety of intrarectal topical anesthesia (ITA) for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed using Medline, Embase and Cochrane central register of controlled trials. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of periprostatic nerve block (PNB), ITA, and PNB combined with ITA were included. The mean pain scores after the biopsy procedure, the mean pain scores after the probe insertion and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-2 RCTs were identified in the meta-analysis. ITA could significantly reduce pain during probe insertion compared to control and placebo. The PNB group had less pain after the prostate biopsy than the ITA group. PNB combined with ITA could significantly reduce pain during the biopsy procedure compared to ITA alone. No significant differences were found in adverse events in ITA versus control, ITA versus placebo, and ITA versus PNB. CONCLUSIONS: ITA could reduce pain after probe insertion and pain after biopsy although it was inferior to PNB in reducing pain during prostate biopsy. ITA combined with PNB was more effective than ITA alone. In addition, it was safe to perform ITA for prostate biopsy.
OBJECTIVE: The study aims to review the current evidence to determine the efficiency and safety of intrarectal topical anesthesia (ITA) for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed using Medline, Embase and Cochrane central register of controlled trials. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of periprostatic nerve block (PNB), ITA, and PNB combined with ITA were included. The mean pain scores after the biopsy procedure, the mean pain scores after the probe insertion and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-2 RCTs were identified in the meta-analysis. ITA could significantly reduce pain during probe insertion compared to control and placebo. The PNB group had less pain after the prostate biopsy than the ITA group. PNB combined with ITA could significantly reduce pain during the biopsy procedure compared to ITA alone. No significant differences were found in adverse events in ITA versus control, ITA versus placebo, and ITA versus PNB. CONCLUSIONS: ITA could reduce pain after probe insertion and pain after biopsy although it was inferior to PNB in reducing pain during prostate biopsy. ITA combined with PNB was more effective than ITA alone. In addition, it was safe to perform ITA for prostate biopsy.
Authors: Joon Se Jung; Hee Nam Moon; Jung Im Kim; Sang Rak Bae; Chang Hee Han; Bong Hee Park Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2021-09-30 Impact factor: 2.370