Otunctemur Alper, Dursun Murat, Besiroglu Huseyin, Can Polat Emre, Cakir Suleyman Sami, Ozbek Emin, Karadeniz Tahir
Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2013 Jun 24;85(2):69-72. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2013.2.69.
Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostete biopsy is accepted as a standard procedure in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Many different protocoles are applied to reduce the pain during the process. In this study we aimed to the comparison of two procedure with intrarectal lidocaine gel and periprostatice nerve blockade respective- ly in addition to perianal intrarectal lidocaine gel on the pain control in prostate biop- sy by TRUS.
473 patients who underwent prostate biopsy guided TRUS between 2008-2012 were included in the study. 10-point linear visual analog pain scale(VAS) was used to evaluate the pain during biopsy. The patients were divided into two groups according to anesthesia procedure. In Group 1, there were 159 patients who had perianal-intrarectal lidocaine gel, in Group 2 there were 314 patients who had periprostatic nerve blockade in addition to intrarectal lidocain gel. The pain about probe manipulation was aseesed by VAS-1 and during the biopsy needle entries was evalu- ated by VAS-2. Results were compared with Mann-Whitney U and Pearson chi-square test.
Mean VAS-2 scores in Group 1 and Group 2 were 4.54 ± 1.02 and 2.06 ± 0.79 respectively. The pain score was determined significantly lower in the Group 2 (p = 0.001). In both groups there was no significant difference in VAS-1 scores, patient’s age, prostate volume, complication rate and PSA level.
The combination of periprostatic nerve blockade and intrarectal lidocain gel provides a more meaningful pain relief compared to group of patients undergoing intrarectal lidocaine gel.
经直肠超声(TRUS)引导下前列腺穿刺活检是前列腺癌诊断的标准程序。为减轻该过程中的疼痛,人们采用了多种不同方案。在本研究中,我们旨在比较经直肠利多卡因凝胶联合前列腺周围神经阻滞与单纯经直肠利多卡因凝胶这两种方法对TRUS引导下前列腺穿刺活检疼痛控制的效果。
纳入2008年至2012年间接受TRUS引导下前列腺穿刺活检的473例患者。采用10分线性视觉模拟疼痛量表(VAS)评估穿刺活检过程中的疼痛程度。根据麻醉方法将患者分为两组。第1组有159例患者,采用肛周 - 直肠内利多卡因凝胶;第2组有314例患者,采用直肠内利多卡因凝胶联合前列腺周围神经阻滞。通过VAS - 1评估探头操作时的疼痛,通过VAS - 2评估活检针穿刺时的疼痛。结果采用Mann - Whitney U检验和Pearson卡方检验进行比较。
第1组和第2组的平均VAS - 2评分分别为4.54±1.02和2.06±0.79。第2组的疼痛评分显著更低(p = 0.001)。两组在VAS - 1评分、患者年龄、前列腺体积、并发症发生率和PSA水平方面均无显著差异。
与单纯直肠内利多卡因凝胶组相比,前列腺周围神经阻滞联合直肠内利多卡因凝胶能更有效地减轻疼痛。