Login   |   Register
Cover Image


The effectivity of periprostatic nerve blockade for the pain control during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy

Alper Otunctemur, Murat Dursun, Huseyin Besiroglu, Emre Can Polat, Suleyman Sami Cakir, Emin Ozbek, Tahir Karadeniz

Authors information
  • Alper Otunctemur
    Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Murat Dursun
    Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey. mrt_drsn@hotmail.com
  • Huseyin Besiroglu
    Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Emre Can Polat
    Balikligol State Hospital, Department of Urology, Sanliurfa, Turkey.
  • Suleyman Sami Cakir
    Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Emin Ozbek
    Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Tahir Karadeniz
    Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.

Abstract


Aim: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusion: 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.

Keywords


Transrectal prostete biopsy; Visual analog scale; Lidocaine; Periprostatic nerve blockade

Full Text





Submitted: 2013-06-24 16:51:37
Published:
Search for citations in Google Scholar
Related articles: Google Scholar


The Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia [pISSN 1124-3562, eISSN 2282-4197] is the official journal of the SIA, SIEUN, SIUrO and UrOP, and it is published online by PAGEPress®, Pavia, Italy. 

 
© PAGEPress 2008-2014     -     PAGEPress is a registered trademark property of PAGEPress srl, Italy.     -     VAT: IT02125780185