Rodger W Rothenberger, Taylen Henry, Laurel Carbone, Jeremy T Gaskins, Ankita Gupta, Sean Francis, Stacy M Lenger
{"title":"Supplemental Lidocaine Patches Prior to Percutaneous Nerve Evaluation, a Randomized Trial.","authors":"Rodger W Rothenberger, Taylen Henry, Laurel Carbone, Jeremy T Gaskins, Ankita Gupta, Sean Francis, Stacy M Lenger","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Improving patient comfort during percutaneous nerve evaluation (PNE), a trial procedure for sacral neuromodulation, is essential.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study was to determine whether the use of a lidocaine patch (LP) prior to PNE procedure improves the pain associated with PNE.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This double-masked, randomized controlled trial compared a 4% LP to placebo patch (PP) immediately prior to PNE. Female patients ≥18 years of age were included if they were undergoing an office PNE, performed bilaterally and without fluoroscopy, for any indication. Either a lidocaine or placebo patch was placed over the sacrum 30 minutes prior to PNE. Additional local anesthesia with 2% lidocaine without epinephrine was administered per surgeon discretion. All patients received some volume of injectable lidocaine with their procedures. Secondary outcomes included volume of injectable lidocaine used, progression to a permanent implant, amplitude of perineal sensation, and patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine women were enrolled, with 20 receiving LP and 19 patients receiving PP. Lower 100-mm visual analog scale pain score was seen in the LP group (45 ± 17 with LP vs 61 ± 21 with PP, P = 0.018). This difference was statistically and clinically significantly different between groups. The total injectable lidocaine, patient satisfaction, and progression to permanent implant were similar between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients experienced clinically and statistically significantly less pain at the time of PNE with a preprocedural LP when compared to placebo, despite similar use of local anesthetic. Satisfaction rates were high among all patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":75288,"journal":{"name":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","volume":" ","pages":"377-383"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001624","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Importance: Improving patient comfort during percutaneous nerve evaluation (PNE), a trial procedure for sacral neuromodulation, is essential.
Objective: The aim of the study was to determine whether the use of a lidocaine patch (LP) prior to PNE procedure improves the pain associated with PNE.
Study design: This double-masked, randomized controlled trial compared a 4% LP to placebo patch (PP) immediately prior to PNE. Female patients ≥18 years of age were included if they were undergoing an office PNE, performed bilaterally and without fluoroscopy, for any indication. Either a lidocaine or placebo patch was placed over the sacrum 30 minutes prior to PNE. Additional local anesthesia with 2% lidocaine without epinephrine was administered per surgeon discretion. All patients received some volume of injectable lidocaine with their procedures. Secondary outcomes included volume of injectable lidocaine used, progression to a permanent implant, amplitude of perineal sensation, and patient satisfaction.
Results: Thirty-nine women were enrolled, with 20 receiving LP and 19 patients receiving PP. Lower 100-mm visual analog scale pain score was seen in the LP group (45 ± 17 with LP vs 61 ± 21 with PP, P = 0.018). This difference was statistically and clinically significantly different between groups. The total injectable lidocaine, patient satisfaction, and progression to permanent implant were similar between groups.
Conclusions: Patients experienced clinically and statistically significantly less pain at the time of PNE with a preprocedural LP when compared to placebo, despite similar use of local anesthetic. Satisfaction rates were high among all patients.