Site of local anaesthesia in transrectal ultrasonography-guided 12-core prostate biopsy: does it make a difference?

Comparative study of standard and small transrectal transducers for prostate ultrasonography

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to evaluate pain and image quality associated with the use of two different ultrasound transducers.

METHODS

Fifty healthy male participants aged 30 years or older were prospectively enrolled. All ultrasound procedures were performed using a V8 machine (Samsung Medison, Seoul, Korea) equipped with EA2-11 (conventional) and miniER7 (small-caliber) transrectal transducers, operated by a single genitourinary radiologist. To minimize bias, one group of volunteers underwent ultrasonography with the conventional transducer first, followed by the small transducer. For the remaining participants, the examinations were performed in the opposite order. Ultrasonography, including the measurement of total prostate and transitional zone volumes, was conducted in accordance with standard practice. After testing with both probes, participants were asked to rate their pain on a 10-point numerical rating scale (NRS). A radiologist then evaluated the quality of the images acquired with each probe using a 5-point numeric scale and compared the prostate volume measurements obtained by each method.

RESULTS

The mean NRS scores associated with the conventional and small transducers were 4.7±1.8 and 2.7±1.2, respectively (P<0.05). The mean ultrasound image qualities from the two transducers were statistically similar (4.78 and 4.74, P>0.05). The whole prostate gland volume as measured with the conventional transducer (mean±standard deviation, 24.2±9.1 mL) was greater than the measurement (22.1±8.7 mL) obtained with the small-caliber transducer (P<0.05). However, only two of the 50 whole gland volume measurements differed by more than two standard deviations.

CONCLUSION

The use of a small transrectal probe significantly reduced pain without compromising image quality.

Does music from noise-canceling headphones have a beneficial effect on men undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy?

Background

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of music with noise-canceling headphones on men undergoing transrectal ultrasound–guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB) in a prospective randomized study.

Methods

From January to February 2020, 94 men underwent TRUSPB at our institution. They were divided into two groups and wore noise-cancelling headphones—group 1 (n = 47) did not listen to music and group 2 (n = 47) listened to music. We examined the patients’ clinical characteristics and compared the objective and subjective measurements before and after the procedures. Primary outcomes included vital signs, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI, 20–80) scale; and the visual analog scale (VAS, 0–10) for the assessments of pain, satisfaction, and willingness to repeat the procedure.

Results

There were no significant differences in patients' characteristics or the prebiopsy status between the groups. Postbiopsy vital signs for objective parameters were statistically similar between the groups; however, the subjective parameters were not. Postbiopsy STAI-state and VAS scores were significantly lower and VAS scores for the patients’ satisfaction and willingness to repeat the procedure were significantly higher in Group 2 than in Group 1 (p = 0.004, p = 0.009, p = 0.004, and p = 0.003, respectively). In addition, changes in the STAI-state score before and after the procedure were significant in Group 2 (p = 0.001).

Conclusions

Music from noise-canceling headphones may have beneficial effects on anxiety, pain, satisfaction, and willingness to repeat the procedure in men undergoing TRUSPB.

Efficacy and safety of a combined anesthetic technique for transrectal prostate biopsy: a single center, prospective, randomized study

Introduction

A transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy is the gold standard for diagnosis of prostatic neoplasia. This exam is associated with pain and discomfort, and numerous methods of analgesia during this procedure have been described. There is still no consensus among urologists about the pain control technique that should be performed, even though the periprostatic basal nerve block is the most studied technique. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the benefit of adding local periapical prostatic anesthesia to the traditional periprostatic basal nerve block during TRUS biopsy.

Material and methods

A total of 70 patients with indication for TRUS biopsy were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 received a periprostatic basal nerve block. Group 2 received both periapical prostatic and periprostatic basal nerve blocks . The pain experienced during different moments of the procedure (introduction of the probe, anesthesia administration, removal of cores and 30 minutes after biopsy) was assessed using visual analog scales of one to ten. The rate of complications at 30 days post-biopsy was also assessed.

Results

The difference in pain during the distinct moments of the TRUS biopsy was not significant between the two groups. There were no significant differences concerning age, level of total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and prostate volume in both groups. There were also no statistically significant differences between the groups regarding the occurrence of complications and pathological findings.

Conclusions

The administration of concurent periprostatic basal and periapical nerve blocks has no significant benefits as compared to a periprostatic basal nerve block alone.

Lateral decubitus position vs. lithotomy position: which is the best way to minimize patient's pain perception during transrectal prostate biopsy?

Introduction

Considering the distinctive nature in terms of psychological stress and anal tone of position which is generally selected between lithotomy and left lateral decubitus (LLD), we postulated its effect on pain perception during biopsy, and investigated their association.

Materials and Methods

A prospective study for comparison of two biopsy positions which were perform in a different working day was conducted for 208 men (lithotomy position=86, LLD=122). The decision on the position was made solely based on the patient’s preference for the biopsy day, and all procedures were performed according to the identical protocol (12-core biopsy with intrarectal lidocaine gel), probe, and needle. The maximal degree of pain during the entire process was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS), immediately after biopsy. After propensity matching, a total of 152 patients were finally selected (lithotomy group=76, LLD=76), then peri-biopsy parameters were compared.

Results

Between groups, no differences were observed across all variables including age, obesity, prostate volume, serum PSA, international prostate symptom score, and cancer detection rate, except mean (±standard deviation) VAS score (3.89±2.01 vs. 4.58±2.22, p=0.049). VAS score showed significant association solely with patient’s position (Pearson’s coefficient=-0.165, p=0.042). In multiple linear regression models regarding the effect of clinical variables on VAS score, patient position was a single independent predictor favoring lithotomy position to decrease perceived pain (B=-0.928, p=0.024).

Conclusions

These data suggest lithotomy position as a proper way to perform transrectal prostate biopsy with routine use of topical lidocaine gel in comparison with conventional LLD position.

Intrarectal ice application prior to transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective randomised trial accessing pain and collateral effects

Objectives

To analyze the efficacy of intrarectal ice application as an anesthetic method prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy.

Materials and Methods

A total of 120 consecutive men were included into the study prospectively. Patients were equally randomized as group 1 and 2 with 60 patients each. Ice was applied as an anesthetic method 5 minutes before procedure to the patients in group 1. Patients in group 2 were applied 10 ml of 2% lidocaine gel 10 minutes before procedure. Twelve core biopsy procedure was performed for all patients. The pain level was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS).

Results

Median pain score was 3.5 (1-8) in group 1 and 5 (1-8) in group 2. There is significantly difference between groups regarding the mean sense of pain level during the procedure. (p=0.007) There was also no difference in complications between two groups about presence and duration of macroscopic hematuria and rectal bleeding.

Conclusions

Intrarectal ice application prior to TRUS prostate biopsy has an effect on reducing pain. Development of new techniques about cold effect or ice can make this method more useful and decrease complication rates.

Identifying the variables associated with pain during transrectal ultrasonography of the prostate

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to prospectively investigate the degree of pain experienced by the patients receiving transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) of the prostate by applying a visual analog scale. We also identified the clinical parameters influencing pain during the TRUS examination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Records were obtained from a prospective database for male patients who received TRUS of prostate in the outpatient department of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, from January 2014 to June 2014. The patients underwent a detailed physical examination and medical history review. Immediately after the TRUS examination, the patients completed questionnaires based on a ten-point visual analog pain scale. The variables of interest were age, body mass index, prostate volume, prostate sagittal length, prostate-specific antigen, previous TRUS experience, external hemorrhoids, anal surgical history, prostate calcification, and image artifact caused by stool in the rectum. All variables were correlated to the visual analog scale by applying multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

By using linear regression analysis, we identified the independent factors that affected the pain score during the TRUS examination. The patients who received the examination for the first time or had longer prostate sagittal lengths, external hemorrhoids, anal surgical history, or stool stored in the rectum experienced more pain during the TRUS examination. Furthermore, the pain was reduced when we provided the patients with a detailed explanation before the procedure and allowed them to observe the real-time images during the examination.

CONCLUSION

Although a TRUS examination is uncomfortable for patients, after having identified the factors affecting pain, physicians can assist patients in reducing pain during the procedure, thus providing higher quality examinations.

Pain during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and the role of periprostatic nerve block: what radiologists should know

Early prostate cancers are best detected with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided core biopsy of the prostate. Due to increased longevity and improved prostate cancer screening, more men are now subjected to TRUS-guided biopsy. To improve the detection rate of early prostate cancer, the current trend is to increase the number of cores obtained. The significant pain associated with the biopsy procedure is usually neglected in clinical practice. Although it is currently underutilized, the periprostatic nerve block is an effective technique to mitigate pain associated with prostate biopsy. This article reviews contemporary issues pertaining to pain during prostate biopsy and discusses the practical aspects of periprostatic nerve block.

Combination of lidocaine suppository and periprostatic nerve block during transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the most effective local analgesia during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS

A total of 123 consecutive patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy for elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and/or a suspicious digital rectal examination were randomized to three groups. Patients received a 60-mg lidocaine suppository (group 1, n = 41), a periprostatic nerve block (10-mL injection of lidocaine hydrochloride; group 2, n = 41) or a combination of both (group 3, n = 41) before a 10-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. A total of 80.5% (n = 99) of the patients underwent their first biopsy, 27.1% (n = 22) their second and 2.4% (n = 2) the third. Pain was evaluated on a 10-point visual analog scale for each step of the procedure.

RESULTS

Prostate-specific antigen values ranged from 0.39 to 90.1 (mean [SD] 8.76 ng/mL [11.08 ng/mL]). Comparison of the median visual analog scale scores between groups 1 and 2 showed a significant difference (P = 0.004). The differences in the outcomes between groups 1 and 3 (P = 0.001), and groups 2 and 3 (P = 0.001) were also significant. Patients of group 3 had the best output corresponding to the pain sensations and therefore the lowest visual analog scale scores.

CONCLUSION

The combination of lidocaine suppository and periprostatic lidocaine infiltration is more effective for pain control than either lidocaine suppository or periprostatic lidocaine infiltration alone in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

A randomized controlled trial of topical glyceryl trinitrate before transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of topical glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) ointment as an adjunct to periprostatic nerve block in reducing pain associated with transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided prostatic biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 148 consecutive patients (mean age 67.0 years) having their first TRUS-guided biopsy were randomized to receive either 0.2% GTN ointment or placebo 10 min before biopsy. All patients had a biopsy preceded by an injection with 10 mL of 1% lidocaine local anaesthesia. A 10-point visual analogue score was used to record 'Overall discomfort due to the presence of the probe', the biopsy itself and pain after the procedure.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in age, PSA level and prostate volume between the groups. There was a significantly lower mean pain score due to probe insertion in the GTN than placebo group (1.94 vs 3.24, P < 0.01); pain perception was lower for the whole procedure in the GTN group, and was most pronounced in men aged <60 years (2.13 vs 4.61, P < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Topical GTN ointment is safe and effective in reducing the discomfort associated with TRUS-guided biopsy of the prostate, in particular the insertion of the ultrasound probe. It might be of maximum benefit in the younger patient and those having a repeat biopsy who previously failed to tolerate the procedure well.

Factors influencing pain during transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy

We prospectively investigated the clinical parameters that influenced pain during prostate biopsies. From 12 hospitals 1781 patients were enrolled. The patients completed a visual analogue scale questionnaire for the pain during the procedure. Age, enema preparation, analgesia use and number of biopsy punctures influenced the level of pain during prostate biopsy in univariate linear regression analysis. However, multivariate analysis showed enema preparation, analgesia use and number of biopsy punctures were independent factors associated with the pain during the procedure. Our study confirmed enema preparation before biopsy and the number of biopsy punctures were associated with the pain during prostate biopsy.

Comparison of traditional basal and apical periprostatic block: impact on injection pain and biopsy pain

OBJECTIVE

To compare the pain of injection and biopsy when lidocaine is injected periprostatically either at a basal or apical site, as the former is commonly used to anaesthetise the prostate, based on several reports showing that it can eliminate most of the pain associated with prostate biopsy, and this site has been favoured over apical injection because the nerves enter the prostate from the basal aspect.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 143 patients scheduled for biopsy were randomized to receive a periprostatic block either at the apex or base of the prostate. Immediately before biopsy 5 mL of 1% lidocaine was injected under transrectal ultrasonographic (TRUS) guidance into the periprostatic nerves bilaterally. Patients were immediately given a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS, 0-100) to assess the pain associated with both the block and the subsequent biopsy.

RESULTS

The mean VAS scores for the anaesthetic block were 21.1 and 22.0 (P = 0.79) and the biopsy VAS scores were 17.6 and 28.7 (P < 0.001) for the apical and basal groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between patients who had a 12- or 20-core biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Apical periprostatic injection with anaesthetic provides better anaesthesia for TRUS biopsy than basal injection, and without increasing the pain associated with injection at the potentially more sensitive apical site.

Preventing pain during office biopsy of the prostate

BACKGROUND

A prospective, double-blind, 3-arm, parallel group, randomized clinical trial was performed to compare 3 anesthetic techniques for preventing pain during prostate biopsy.

METHODS

A total of 243 men undergoing a 12-core prostate biopsy were randomized to 1 of 3 anesthetic methods: 1) seminal vesical-prostatic base blockade, 2) intraprostatic blockade, and 3) apical-rectal blockade. Pain was estimated with the 10-point visual analog scale. Multivariate logistic regression evaluated factors predictive of pain. The Kruskal-Wallis test analyzed overall group comparisons and the Steel-Dwass test assessed between-group comparisons in pain scores. Proportional odds ordinal logistic regression quantified the ability of covariates and treatment arms to predict biopsy pain. These values are presented as odds ratios with confidence intervals (OR, 95% CI).

RESULTS

From November 2005 to June 2006, 81 men were randomized to 3 study arms. Lidocaine administration was the most painful element of the procedure, while probe insertion was the least. Apical biopsies were routinely more painful than mid-gland biopsies, which were more painful than base biopsies. The apical-rectal blockade was the most painful to administer, but has lasting effects and led to better pain control than the prostatic base-seminal vesicle blockade. Similarly, the intraprostatic blockade was more effective than the prostatic base-seminal vesicle blockade. Besides pain reported at the time of anesthetic injection, no difference was identified between the intraprostatic and apical-rectal blockades.

CONCLUSIONS

Mid and apical biopsies of the prostate are more painful than base biopsies. The seminal vesicle-prostatic base blockade is less effective than intraprostatic and apical-rectal blockade at controlling pain.