Noninfiltrative anesthesia for transrectal prostate biopsy: A randomized prospective study comparing lidocaine-prilocaine cream and lidocaine-ketorolac gel

Abstract Objectives Periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) is the standard anesthesia for ultrasound (US) guided transrectal prostate biopsy (TPB), but periprostatic infiltration itself constitutes a major, though often neglected, source of discomfort even in patients receiving perianal-intrarectal lidoca...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inUrologic oncology Vol. 31; no. 1; pp. 68 - 73
Main Authors Cormio, Luigi, Ph.D, Lorusso, Fabrizio, M.D, Selvaggio, Oscar, M.D, Perrone, Antonia, M.D, Sanguedolce, Francesca, M.D, Pagliarulo, Vincenzo, M.D, Bufo, Pantaleo, Ph.D, Carrieri, Giuseppe, Ph.D
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Elsevier Inc 2013
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Abstract Objectives Periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) is the standard anesthesia for ultrasound (US) guided transrectal prostate biopsy (TPB), but periprostatic infiltration itself constitutes a major, though often neglected, source of discomfort even in patients receiving perianal-intrarectal lidocaine-prilocaine (PILP) cream before PPNB. Noninfiltrative anesthesia therefore represents an attractive alternative to periprostatic infiltration. With this in mind, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of perianal-intrarectal (PI) lidocaine gel, lidocaine-ketorolac gel, and lidocaine-prilocaine cream in relieving pain during TPB. Materials and methods Three hundred consecutive patients scheduled for US-guided TPB were randomized 1:1:1 to receive PI administration of 5 g 2.5% lidocaine gel 10 minutes before TPB (Group 1), or a mixture of 5 g 2.5% lidocaine gel and 0.3% ketorolac tromethamine solution 1 hour before TPB (Group 2), or 5 g 2.5% lidocaine and 2.5% prilocaine cream 20 minutes before TPB (Group 3). The 0-to-10 points visual analogue scale (VAS) was used for assessing pain at probe insertion and movements (VAS-1), at prostate sampling (VAS-2), and maximal procedural pain (MPP). Complications occurring up to 20 days after the procedure were also recorded. Results Four (1.3%) patients were excluded because of unbearable pain during the procedure, leaving Group 1 with 98 patients, Group 2 with 99, and Group 3 with 99; the 3 groups were comparable for patients' age, serum PSA, prostate volume, and cancer detection rate. The addition of either ketorolac or prilocaine to lidocaine significantly ( P < 0.0001) reduced probe-related, sampling-related, and maximal procedural pain. Compared with lidocaine-prilocaine, lidocaine-ketorolac was less effective in relieving probe-related pain (mean VAS-1: 1.47 ± 1.30 vs. 0.39 ± 0.65; P < 0.0001) but more effective in relieving sampling-related pain (mean VAS-2: 0.76 ± 0.94 vs. 1.54 ± 1.02; P < 0.0001); there was no difference in MPP (mean 1.82 ± 1.21 vs. 1.67 ± 0.95), probably due to such different efficacy on the two pain sources. Complications were similar in the 3 groups. Conclusions Lidocaine-prilocaine cream was most effective on probe-related pain, whereas lidocaine-ketorolac gel was most effective on sampling-related pain. These noninfiltrative anesthetics were safe, easy to administer, and well accepted by patients; the possibility to combine them to further improve pain control during TPB deserves further well-designed studies.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ISSN:1078-1439
1873-2496
DOI:10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.09.004