A randomized controlled comparison between periprostatic nerve block and pelvic plexus block at the base and apex of 14-core prostate biopsies
- 17 Downloads
To compare the pain control efficacies of the pelvic plexus block (PPB), periprostatic nerve block (PNB), and controls during a 14-core basal and apical core prostate biopsy.
This randomized controlled study, performed between January 2015 and January 2016, included patients with an abnormal serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA > 3 ng/mL) level or a palpable nodule on digital rectal examination. The enrolled patients were randomized into three groups: Group 1, intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA, 10 mL of 2% lidocaine jelly) and PPB with 3.0 mL of 2% lidocaine injected at the bilateral pelvic plexus; Group 2, IRLA and PNB with 3.0 mL of 2% lidocaine injected at both periprostatic nerves; and Group 3, only IRLA. Patients answered the visual analog scale (VAS) questionnaire at 6 time points.
This study consisted of 163 patients (Group 1 = 55, Group 2 = 55, and Group 3 = 53). Pain at the apical biopsy location was less in Groups 1 and 2 than in Group 3 (p < 0.001, p < 0.001) and between the two local anesthetic groups (PNB + IRLA vs PPB + IRLA). Group 2 patients reported less pain than Group 1 patients (p = 0.022). Pain during the basal core biopsy was significantly less in Groups 1 and 2 than in Group 3 (p = 0.002, p < 0.001), but there were no significant differences in pain control between the two methods (PNB + IRLA vs PPB + IRLA, p = 0.054) during basal core biopsy.
PNB + IRLA is an effective local anesthetic method for reducing pain when performing apical biopsies compared with PPB + IRLA or IRLA alone.
KeywordsPelvic plexus Prostate Biopsy Pain
SJK: data management, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing. JL: data collection, data analysis. DHA: data collection data analysis. CP: data analysis. JHL: project development. HGK: manuscript writing/editing. JYP: project development, manuscript editing.
This work was supported by Gangneung Asan Hospital Medical Institute and was funded by the Asan Foundation (2014-009).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 2.Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, Mason M, Matveev V, Wiegel T, Zattoni F, Mottet N (2014) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent—update 2013. Eur Urol 65:124–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Adamakis I, Mitropoulos D, Haritopoulos K, Alamanis C, Stravodimos K, Giannopoulos A (2004) Pain during transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy: a randomized prospective trial comparing periprostatic infiltration with lidocaine with the intrarectal instillation of lidocaine-prilocain cream. World J Urol 22:281–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-003-0386-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Cantiello F, Cicione A, Autorino R, Cosentino C, Amato F, Damiano R (2012) Pelvic plexus block is more effective than periprostatic nerve block for pain control during office transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a single center, prospective, randomized, double arm study. J Urol 188:417–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.04.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Jindal T, Mukherjee S, Sinha RK, Kamal MR, Ghosh N, Saha B, Mitra N, Sharma PK, Mandal SN, Karmakar D (2015) Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided pelvic plexus block to reduce pain during prostate biopsy: a randomised controlled trial. BJU Int 115:892–896. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12872 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Berger AP, Frauscher F, Halpern EJ, Spranger R, Steiner H, Bartsch G, Horninger W (2003) Periprostatic administration of local anesthesia during transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Urology 61:585–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(02)02406-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Moussa AS, Meshref A, Schoenfield L, Masoud A, Abdel-Rahman S, Li J, Flazoura S, Magi-Galluzzi C, Fergany A, Fareed K, Jones JS (2010) Importance of additional “extreme” anterior apical needle biopsies in the initial detection of prostate cancer. Urology 75:1034–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.11.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Bjurlin MA, Carter HB, Schellhammer P, Cookson MS, Gomella LG, Troyer D, Wheeler TM, Schlossberg S, Penson DF, Taneja SS (2013) Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice: sampling, labeling and specimen processing. J Urol 189:2039–2046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar