Urabe Fumihiko, Kimura Takahiro, Shimomura Tatsuya, Onuma Hajime, Yamamoto Toshihiro, Sasaki Hiroshi, Miki Jun, Kuruma Hidetoshi, Miki Kenta, Egawa Shin
a Department of Urology , Jikei University School of Medicine , Tokyo , Japan.
Scand J Urol. 2017 Aug;51(4):245-250. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1318299. Epub 2017 Apr 26.
The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of caudal block (CB) versus periprostatic nerve block (PPNB), both with intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA), in reducing pain during transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided prostatic biopsy.
This study included 532 patients: 266 patients received CB with IRLA and 266 patients PPNB with IRLA. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was applied to prospectively evaluate pain (1) at induction of anesthesia, (2) at insertion of the TRUS probe, (3) at needle penetration to the prostate, and (4) throughout the biopsy procedure. Pain scores were compared to evaluate differences between groups. The secondary endpoint of serious complication rate was also evaluated. As a subanalysis, the pain scores were compared in patients with high body mass index (BMI ≥25 kg/m²).
Overall, the pain score in the PPNB group was significantly lower than in the CB group at induction of anesthesia (mean ± SD: 2.0 ± 1.9 vs 2.9 ± 2.1, p = .0001) but higher at insertion of the TRUS probe (2.7 ± 2.5 vs 1.9 ± 1.7, p = .009). The pain score did not differ significantly between groups at needle penetration or throughout the biopsy. Univariate analyses indicated no significant association between VAS scores and patient demographics. Overall rates of serious complications did not differ between the two groups (5.6% vs 5.3%, p = .85). In patients with high BMI, the pain score was significantly lower in the PPNB group than in the CB group throughout the procedure (2.5 ± 2.0 vs 3.5 ± 2.5, p = .03).
Both procedures were equally effective in reducing pain, and the incidence of serious complications was similar. PPNB with IRLA may be more applicable than CB with IRLA in obese patients.
本研究旨在比较在经直肠超声(TRUS)引导下前列腺穿刺活检过程中,骶管阻滞(CB)与前列腺周围神经阻滞(PPNB)联合直肠内局部麻醉(IRLA)在减轻疼痛方面的效果。
本研究纳入532例患者:266例患者接受CB联合IRLA,266例患者接受PPNB联合IRLA。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)前瞻性评估疼痛程度:(1)麻醉诱导时;(2)TRUS探头插入时;(3)穿刺针进入前列腺时;(4)整个活检过程中。比较疼痛评分以评估组间差异。还评估了严重并发症发生率这一次要终点。作为亚组分析,比较了高体重指数(BMI≥25kg/m²)患者的疼痛评分。
总体而言,PPNB组在麻醉诱导时的疼痛评分显著低于CB组(均值±标准差:2.0±1.9 vs 2.9±2.1,p = 0.0001),但在TRUS探头插入时更高(2.7±2.5 vs 1.9±1.7,p = 0.009)。在穿刺针进入前列腺时或整个活检过程中,两组的疼痛评分无显著差异。单因素分析表明VAS评分与患者人口统计学特征之间无显著关联。两组严重并发症的总体发生率无差异(5.6% vs 5.3%,p = 0.85)。在高BMI患者中,PPNB组在整个过程中的疼痛评分显著低于CB组(2.5±2.0 vs 3.5±2.5,p = 0.03)。
两种方法在减轻疼痛方面同样有效,严重并发症的发生率相似。PPNB联合IRLA在肥胖患者中可能比CB联合IRLA更适用。