Richman Jeffrey M, Carter H Ballentine, Hanna Marie N, Murphy Jamie D, Rowlingson Andrew J, Andrews Robert A F, Wu Christopher L
Department of Anesthesiology, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21287, USA.
Urology. 2006 Jun;67(6):1224-8. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.12.030.
To perform a meta-analysis of available randomized trials investigating the analgesic efficacy of periprostatic block with local anesthetic.
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.
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]).
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.
对现有的研究局部麻醉剂前列腺周围阻滞镇痛效果的随机试验进行荟萃分析。
检索美国国立医学图书馆的PubMed数据库1966年至2005年8月16日期间的所有相关文章。纳入标准包括接受前列腺活检的受试者、随机试验,其中随机分组的一组在前列腺活检前使用局部麻醉剂进行前列腺周围阻滞,且活检疼痛评估以适合我们荟萃分析统计分析的形式提供。
我们的检索得到107篇摘要,其中共有16篇文章符合所有纳入标准。660名受试者接受了前列腺周围阻滞的局部麻醉剂,616名受试者未接受。两组之间的加权平均差异表明,接受局部麻醉剂前列腺周围阻滞的受试者与未接受者相比,疼痛评分在统计学上更低(视觉模拟疼痛的加权平均差异为-1.66[95%置信区间-2.03至-1.29])。
我们的荟萃分析表明,前列腺活检使用局部麻醉剂进行前列腺周围阻滞可能会在活检过程中显著降低疼痛程度。由于局部麻醉剂前列腺周围阻滞相对易于实施,且似乎与发病率增加无关,进行前列腺活检的临床医生应考虑常规使用该技术。