Cargando…
An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study
BACKGROUND: Periprostatic infiltration anesthesia (PPIA) and intrarectal topical anesthesia (IRTA) are recommended methods to control pain in transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx). This study evaluates the factors affecting pain during TRUS-Bx, considering the pathologies involved i...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
PeerJ Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8428265/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34567848 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12144 |
_version_ | 1783750343900790784 |
---|---|
author | Cebeci, Oğuz Özden Ozkan, Alp |
author_facet | Cebeci, Oğuz Özden Ozkan, Alp |
author_sort | Cebeci, Oğuz Özden |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Periprostatic infiltration anesthesia (PPIA) and intrarectal topical anesthesia (IRTA) are recommended methods to control pain in transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx). This study evaluates the factors affecting pain during TRUS-Bx, considering the pathologies involved in anorectal pain etiology and comparing the effectiveness of local anesthesia techniques in providing patient comfort. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 477 consecutive patients with TRUS-Bx for elevated Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA), abnormal rectal examination findings, or both. Patients were grouped as local anesthesia methods for pain control during TRUS-Bx. Both groups were compared in terms of age, body mass index, clinical T stage, PSA, prostate volume, number of biopsy cores, type of anesthesia, previous biopsy history, and presence of prostate cancer. We used a visual analog pain scale (VAS) to evaluate the patient’s pain status; pre-procedure (VAS-0), during probe insertion (VAS-I), administration of anesthetic (VAS-A), and simultaneous with the biopsy procedure itself (VAS-Bx). For PPIA and IRTA, 4 ml lidocaine 20 mg/ml injection and 5 g 5% prilocaine-5% lidocaine cream was used, respectively. RESULTS: The PPIA was used 74.2% (n = 354) and IRTA was used for 25.8% (n = 123) patients. VAS-0, VAS-I, and VAS-A scores are similar between groups. VAS-Bx was significantly higher in the IRTA than in the PPIA (3.37 ± 0.18 vs. 2.36 ± 0.12 p > 0.001). Clinical T stage (OR: 0.59), number of biopsy cores (OR: 1.80), and type of anesthesia application (OR: 2.65) were independent variables on TRUS-Bx for pain. CONCLUSION: Three factors play roles as independent variables associated with the pain in TRUS-Bx; abnormal rectal examination findings, collection of more than twelve core samples during the biopsy, and the type of anesthesia used. Compared with PPIA, IRTA does not improve pain related to probe insertion, and using IRTA results in higher pain scores for biopsy-related pain. Thus, we recommend a PPIA to lower biopsy-related pain. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8428265 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | PeerJ Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84282652021-09-24 An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study Cebeci, Oğuz Özden Ozkan, Alp PeerJ Anesthesiology and Pain Management BACKGROUND: Periprostatic infiltration anesthesia (PPIA) and intrarectal topical anesthesia (IRTA) are recommended methods to control pain in transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx). This study evaluates the factors affecting pain during TRUS-Bx, considering the pathologies involved in anorectal pain etiology and comparing the effectiveness of local anesthesia techniques in providing patient comfort. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 477 consecutive patients with TRUS-Bx for elevated Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA), abnormal rectal examination findings, or both. Patients were grouped as local anesthesia methods for pain control during TRUS-Bx. Both groups were compared in terms of age, body mass index, clinical T stage, PSA, prostate volume, number of biopsy cores, type of anesthesia, previous biopsy history, and presence of prostate cancer. We used a visual analog pain scale (VAS) to evaluate the patient’s pain status; pre-procedure (VAS-0), during probe insertion (VAS-I), administration of anesthetic (VAS-A), and simultaneous with the biopsy procedure itself (VAS-Bx). For PPIA and IRTA, 4 ml lidocaine 20 mg/ml injection and 5 g 5% prilocaine-5% lidocaine cream was used, respectively. RESULTS: The PPIA was used 74.2% (n = 354) and IRTA was used for 25.8% (n = 123) patients. VAS-0, VAS-I, and VAS-A scores are similar between groups. VAS-Bx was significantly higher in the IRTA than in the PPIA (3.37 ± 0.18 vs. 2.36 ± 0.12 p > 0.001). Clinical T stage (OR: 0.59), number of biopsy cores (OR: 1.80), and type of anesthesia application (OR: 2.65) were independent variables on TRUS-Bx for pain. CONCLUSION: Three factors play roles as independent variables associated with the pain in TRUS-Bx; abnormal rectal examination findings, collection of more than twelve core samples during the biopsy, and the type of anesthesia used. Compared with PPIA, IRTA does not improve pain related to probe insertion, and using IRTA results in higher pain scores for biopsy-related pain. Thus, we recommend a PPIA to lower biopsy-related pain. PeerJ Inc. 2021-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8428265/ /pubmed/34567848 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12144 Text en ©2021 Cebeci and Ozkan https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited. |
spellingShingle | Anesthesiology and Pain Management Cebeci, Oğuz Özden Ozkan, Alp An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study |
title | An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study |
title_full | An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study |
title_fullStr | An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study |
title_short | An evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study |
title_sort | evaluation of factors affecting pain during transrectal ultrasonographic prostate biopsy: a real-life scenario in a retrospective cohort study |
topic | Anesthesiology and Pain Management |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8428265/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34567848 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12144 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cebecioguzozden anevaluationoffactorsaffectingpainduringtransrectalultrasonographicprostatebiopsyareallifescenarioinaretrospectivecohortstudy AT ozkanalp anevaluationoffactorsaffectingpainduringtransrectalultrasonographicprostatebiopsyareallifescenarioinaretrospectivecohortstudy AT cebecioguzozden evaluationoffactorsaffectingpainduringtransrectalultrasonographicprostatebiopsyareallifescenarioinaretrospectivecohortstudy AT ozkanalp evaluationoffactorsaffectingpainduringtransrectalultrasonographicprostatebiopsyareallifescenarioinaretrospectivecohortstudy |