Comparison of different local anesthesia techniques during TRUS-guided biopsies: A prospective pilot study
To introduce two forms of anesthesia and compare them with standard local anesthesia techniques. A total of 114 consecutive patients underwent prostate needle biopsy. The patients were sequentially randomized to receive different kinds of anesthesia: 2% rectal lidocaine gel, 40% dimethyl sulfoxide (...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2005, Vol.65 (1), p.109-113 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | To introduce two forms of anesthesia and compare them with standard local anesthesia techniques.
A total of 114 consecutive patients underwent prostate needle biopsy. The patients were sequentially randomized to receive different kinds of anesthesia: 2% rectal lidocaine gel, 40% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) with lidocaine, perianal injection of 1% lidocaine, or periprostatic nerve block. Pain perception was separately assessed for probe insertion and biopsies using a visual pain analog score. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the data scale among the four groups. A linear regression model was used to define the independent variables that predicted the level of pain.
The groups were similar in terms of age, prostate-specific antigen levels, digital rectal examination findings, prostate volume, pain tolerance, biopsy time, and number of cores taken. The lowest pain scores for probe insertion were for the perianal injection and DMSO/lidocaine groups (0.89 and 1.38, respectively). The difference between these scores and those for the other two groups was statistically significant (
P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0090-4295 1527-9995 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.urology.2004.08.013 |