Comparison of two different anesthetic methods on pain perception in prostate biopsy

Engin Kolukcu
{"title":"Comparison of two different anesthetic methods on pain perception in prostate biopsy","authors":"Engin Kolukcu","doi":"10.4328/JCAM.6028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"DOI: 10.4328/JCAM.6028 Received: 23.09.2018 Accepted: 25.10.2018 Published Online: 30.10.2018 Printed: 01.01.2019 J Clin Anal Med 2019;10(1): 121-4 Corresponding Author: Engin Kolukcu, Department of Urology, Tokat State Hospital, Tokat, Turkey. GSM: +905354002385 F.: +90 3562120258 E-Mail: drenginkolukcu@gmail.com ORCID ID: 0000-0003-3387-4428 Abstract Aim: In this study, we aimed to compare the efficiency of two different local anesthetic techniques in transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy. Material and Method: The medical records of 798 patients who underwent 12 core transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy were evaluated retrospectively. The patients were divided into 2 groups to receive two different kinds of anesthesia during the procedure as follows: Group 1, rectal application of 2% lidocaine gel and Group 2 periprostatic nerve block. The perception of pain during the insertion of the probe and during the biopsy procedure was scored for each group separately by using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: The mean age, mean total PSA level and mean prostate volume of the patients in Group 1 were 67.67 ± 8.91 years, 12.57 ± 17.67 ng/ml and 51.41 ± 22.62 ml respectively. The mean age, mean total PSA level and mean prostate volume of the patients in Group 2 were 64.64 ± 7.63 years, 13 ± 18.02 ng/ml and 53.44 ± 44.01 ml respectively. The mean VAS scores of Group 1 and Group 2 during probe insertion were 4,87 ± 1,14 and 5,19 ± 1,16 respectively (p<0.001). The mean VAS scores during biopsy were 3,56 ± 1,43 for Group 1 and 2,5 ± 0,91 for Group 2. The difference between these scores was statistically significant (p<0.001). Discussion: Using of lidocaine gel for analgesia in TRUS-guided prostate biopsy significantly decreases the perception of pain experienced during the probe insertion procedure. On the other hand, PPNB is more effective than the using of lidocaine gel in pain control when the level of pain experienced during the biopsy is examined. Analgesia is substantially ensured by using PPNB, but analgesia combined with topical anesthetic agents could provide a more comfortable biopsy procedure.","PeriodicalId":44485,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Analytical Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Analytical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4328/JCAM.6028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

DOI: 10.4328/JCAM.6028 Received: 23.09.2018 Accepted: 25.10.2018 Published Online: 30.10.2018 Printed: 01.01.2019 J Clin Anal Med 2019;10(1): 121-4 Corresponding Author: Engin Kolukcu, Department of Urology, Tokat State Hospital, Tokat, Turkey. GSM: +905354002385 F.: +90 3562120258 E-Mail: drenginkolukcu@gmail.com ORCID ID: 0000-0003-3387-4428 Abstract Aim: In this study, we aimed to compare the efficiency of two different local anesthetic techniques in transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy. Material and Method: The medical records of 798 patients who underwent 12 core transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy were evaluated retrospectively. The patients were divided into 2 groups to receive two different kinds of anesthesia during the procedure as follows: Group 1, rectal application of 2% lidocaine gel and Group 2 periprostatic nerve block. The perception of pain during the insertion of the probe and during the biopsy procedure was scored for each group separately by using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: The mean age, mean total PSA level and mean prostate volume of the patients in Group 1 were 67.67 ± 8.91 years, 12.57 ± 17.67 ng/ml and 51.41 ± 22.62 ml respectively. The mean age, mean total PSA level and mean prostate volume of the patients in Group 2 were 64.64 ± 7.63 years, 13 ± 18.02 ng/ml and 53.44 ± 44.01 ml respectively. The mean VAS scores of Group 1 and Group 2 during probe insertion were 4,87 ± 1,14 and 5,19 ± 1,16 respectively (p<0.001). The mean VAS scores during biopsy were 3,56 ± 1,43 for Group 1 and 2,5 ± 0,91 for Group 2. The difference between these scores was statistically significant (p<0.001). Discussion: Using of lidocaine gel for analgesia in TRUS-guided prostate biopsy significantly decreases the perception of pain experienced during the probe insertion procedure. On the other hand, PPNB is more effective than the using of lidocaine gel in pain control when the level of pain experienced during the biopsy is examined. Analgesia is substantially ensured by using PPNB, but analgesia combined with topical anesthetic agents could provide a more comfortable biopsy procedure.
两种麻醉方法对前列腺活检疼痛感知的比较
DOI: 10.4328 / JCAM.6028收稿日期:23.09.2018收稿日期:25.10.2018出版日期:30.10.2018出版日期:01.01.2019 J clinical Anal Med 2019;10(1): 121-4通讯作者:Engin Kolukcu, Tokat State Hospital泌尿外科,Tokat, Turkey。摘要目的:在本研究中,我们旨在比较两种不同的局部麻醉技术在经直肠超声(TRUS)引导下前列腺活检的效率。材料与方法:回顾性分析798例经直肠超声引导下12例核心前列腺活检患者的病历。将患者分为两组,在手术过程中分别给予2%利多卡因凝胶直肠麻醉和前列腺周围神经阻滞。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)分别对每组患者在插入探针和活检过程中的疼痛感觉进行评分。结果:1组患者平均年龄67.67±8.91岁,平均总PSA水平12.57±17.67 ng/ml,平均前列腺体积51.41±22.62 ml。2组患者平均年龄为64.64±7.63岁,平均总PSA水平为13±18.02 ng/ml,平均前列腺体积为53.44±44.01 ml。1组和2组在插入探针时的平均VAS评分分别为4.87±1.14分和5.19±1.16分(p<0.001)。活检时VAS平均评分为:1组(3.56±1.43)分,2组(2.5±0.91)分。这些评分之间的差异有统计学意义(p<0.001)。讨论:在超声引导下的前列腺活检中使用利多卡因凝胶镇痛可显著降低探针插入过程中疼痛的感觉。另一方面,当检查活检过程中经历的疼痛水平时,PPNB比使用利多卡因凝胶更有效地控制疼痛。使用PPNB基本上保证了镇痛,但镇痛联合表面麻醉剂可以提供更舒适的活检过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical and Analytical Medicine
Journal of Clinical and Analytical Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Annals of Clinical and Analytical Medicine is an international open-access journal containing peer-reviewed high-quality articles on clinical medicine in the areas of all research study types, reviews, and case reports. Our journal has become an important platform with the help of language support services, which make it easier for writers who have English as their second language to share their clinical experiences with the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信