The Effects of Combination Perianal-Intrarectal Lidocaine-Prilocaine Cream and Periprostatic Nerve Block for Pain Control during Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy of the Prostate: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Effect of Virtual Reality Glasses Application on Pain, Anxiety, and Patient Satisfaction During a Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

This study aims to determine the effect of virtual reality glasses application on pain, anxiety, and patient satisfaction during a transrectal prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted with pre-tests, post-tests, and a control group, using a randomized controlled experimental research design. A total of 70 patients (35 in the intervention group and 35 in the control group) were included in the study. The intervention group watched a video with virtual reality glasses during the biopsy process. A Descriptive Information Form, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-I, STAI-II), Scale of Patient Perception of Hospital Experience with Nursing Care (PPHEN), and Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS) were used for data collection. To evaluate the data, numbers, percentages, mean, standard deviation, chi-square, paired sample t test, independent samples t test, regression analysis, and Cronbach's alpha Reliability Coefficient were used.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of descriptive and clinical characteristics (p > .05). The mean VAS and STAI post-test scores of the patients in the intervention group were lower than the control group, and the difference between them was statistically significant (p < .05). The mean PPHEN post-test scores of the patients in the intervention group were significantly higher than those in the control group (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

The application of virtual reality glasses during a transrectal prostate biopsy significantly reduced the level of pain and anxiety and increased patient satisfaction.

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.

Local anesthesia for pain control during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intrarectal local anesthestic (IRLA), periprostatic nerve block (PPNB), and the combined modalities in alleviating the pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was performed to identify all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about IRLA vs no anesthesia or placebo gel; PPNB vs no injection, periprostatic placebo injection, or IRLA; combined PPNB and IRLA vs PPNB alone; and combined PPNB and intraprostatic nerve block (IPNB) vs PPNB alone before TRUS-guided biopsy. Sources included MEDILINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from 1980 to 2016. The main outcomes were biopsy pain score, probe manipulation pain score, and anesthetic infiltration pain score assessed by the visual pain scale.

RESULTS

A total of 26 articles involving 36 RCTs were used in this analysis: Although IRLA can lead to pain reduction, the result was not statistically significant when compared with no anesthesia or placebo gel (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.22, 95% CI: -0.45 to 0, P=0.06). PPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with no analgesia (WMD: -1.32, 95% CI: -1.68 to -0.95, P<0.00001), placebo injection (WMD: -2.62, 95% CI: -3.16 to -2.07, P<0.00001), or IRLA (WMD: -1.31, 95% CI: -1.40 to -1.22, P<0.00001). PPNB + IRLA can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.45, 95% CI: -0.62 to -0.28, P<0.00001). PPNB + IPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.73, 95% CI: -0.92 to -0.55, P<0.00001). There were no severe reported general or local complications related to local anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicates that a combination of PPNB and IRLA/IPNB is effective and safe in alleviating the pain during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to validate this result.

Evaluation of the efficacy of a combination of diltiazem and periprostatic nerve block in pain control during transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate

INTRODUCTION

The choice of analgesia during prostate biopsy remains controversial. The pain has dual origin: from the insertion of the probe as well as the biopsy itself. Periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) is currently the gold standard modality for decreasing pain of prostate biopsy but it does not alleviate the pain of probe insertion. A randomised controlled trial was performed to test the efficacy and safety of the combination of topical application of diltiazem gel and PPNB for pain control during transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS

A total of 73 patients who were to undergo their first prostate biopsy were randomised to receive either 2ml of 2% topical diltiazem gel or a placebo 15 minutes before the biopsy. All the patients then had a PPNB using 1% lignocaine. A ten- point visual analogue scale was used to record the pain immediately after the insertion of the probe and during the biopsy. Any adverse effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the mean age and prostate volumes between the groups. There was a significantly lower mean pain score due to probe insertion in those patients who received topical diltiazem than in the placebo group (p<0.0001). There was no significant difference between the pain scores during the biopsy itself between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical diltiazem significantly reduces the pain of probe insertion during prostate biopsy and can be used effectively as an adjuvant to PPNB.

Efficacy and cost analysis of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy under monitored anesthesia

Sedation may result in reduction in pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of propofol and remifentanil infusion during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy and the related increases in health care costs. From January to September 2010, 100 men undergoing a transrectal prostate biopsy were randomized into two groups. In Group 1, 50 patients received a combined infusion of propofol and remifentanil; in Group 2, 50 patients received lidocaine jelly. After TRUS-guided biopsies were performed, pain and patient satisfaction were evaluated by a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS), and a cost-related patient satisfaction questionnaire was completed by all patients. Patients were also asked whether they would be willing to undergo repeat biopsy by the same method. Patients in Group 1 showed a significantly lower VAS score than those in Group 2 (mean VAS score: 0.9±1.1 versus 6.3±2.5; P<0.001). In addition, the patient satisfaction scale was significantly higher in Group 1 (P=0.002). Although the overall cost was significantly higher in Group 1 (P=0.006), patient satisfaction scales considering cost were also higher in this group (P=0.009). A combination of propofol and remifentanil is a safe and effective way to decrease patient pain and increase patient satisfaction during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Although the costs were higher in the group that received sedation, as expected, the patients exhibited heightened satisfaction and willingness to repeat biopsies by the same method.