Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasonography-Guided Prostate Biopsies Analgesia's; Rectal Lidocaine Gel Versus Sandwich Anesthesia (Transurethral Plus Transrectal Lidocaine Gel Administration): A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled and Prospective Study.

IF 1 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital Pub Date : 2023-09-29 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.14744/SEMB.2023.33269
Nihat Turkmen, Cemil Kutsal, Semih Turk, Sinan Levent Kirecci, Abdullah Hizir Yavuzsan, Soner Guney
{"title":"Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasonography-Guided Prostate Biopsies Analgesia's; Rectal Lidocaine Gel Versus Sandwich Anesthesia (Transurethral Plus Transrectal Lidocaine Gel Administration): A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled and Prospective Study.","authors":"Nihat Turkmen,&nbsp;Cemil Kutsal,&nbsp;Semih Turk,&nbsp;Sinan Levent Kirecci,&nbsp;Abdullah Hizir Yavuzsan,&nbsp;Soner Guney","doi":"10.14744/SEMB.2023.33269","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the additive transurethral anesthetic agent to transrectal anesthetic agent.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Transrectal ultrasound-guided 12 core prostate biopsy planned, 237 patients included in our study. The patients randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 (n=113): Only transrectal 2% lidocaine, Group 2 (n=124): Transrectal + Transurethral(Sandwiches) lidocaine gel given to the patients 10 min before the procedure as anesthesia. Immediately after the biopsy, the patient questioned about the level of pain he felt during the needle entry. The evaluation measured by the VAS score. Immediately after biopsy satisfaction rate with the procedure and if rebiopsy was required, acceptance was scored between 1 and 4. The two groups compared statistically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean VAS score of Group 1 and Group 2 was 4.88±1.89 and 3.77±1.83, respectively. The pain level of Group 2 was lower than Group 1' pain level. The difference between the two groups was considered statistically significant (p<0.001). The patient satisfaction rates of Group 1 and Group 2 found to be 2.45±0.71 and 2.78±0.66, and the acceptance rate of rebiopsy was 2.81±0.69 and 3.02±0.51, respectively. The patient satisfaction rate and acceptance rate of the rebiopsy of Group 2 were higher than Group 1. Patient satisfaction level (p<0.001) and rebiopsy acceptance rate (p=0.014) between the two groups found to be statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the TRUS-guided prostate biopsies, sandwich anesthesia is a cheap, convenient, tolerable, and effective method.</p>","PeriodicalId":42218,"journal":{"name":"Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10600600/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/SEMB.2023.33269","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the additive transurethral anesthetic agent to transrectal anesthetic agent.

Methods: Transrectal ultrasound-guided 12 core prostate biopsy planned, 237 patients included in our study. The patients randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 (n=113): Only transrectal 2% lidocaine, Group 2 (n=124): Transrectal + Transurethral(Sandwiches) lidocaine gel given to the patients 10 min before the procedure as anesthesia. Immediately after the biopsy, the patient questioned about the level of pain he felt during the needle entry. The evaluation measured by the VAS score. Immediately after biopsy satisfaction rate with the procedure and if rebiopsy was required, acceptance was scored between 1 and 4. The two groups compared statistically.

Results: The mean VAS score of Group 1 and Group 2 was 4.88±1.89 and 3.77±1.83, respectively. The pain level of Group 2 was lower than Group 1' pain level. The difference between the two groups was considered statistically significant (p<0.001). The patient satisfaction rates of Group 1 and Group 2 found to be 2.45±0.71 and 2.78±0.66, and the acceptance rate of rebiopsy was 2.81±0.69 and 3.02±0.51, respectively. The patient satisfaction rate and acceptance rate of the rebiopsy of Group 2 were higher than Group 1. Patient satisfaction level (p<0.001) and rebiopsy acceptance rate (p=0.014) between the two groups found to be statistically significant.

Conclusion: In the TRUS-guided prostate biopsies, sandwich anesthesia is a cheap, convenient, tolerable, and effective method.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经直肠超声引导前列腺活检镇痛效果的比较;直肠利多卡因凝胶与夹层麻醉(经尿道加经直肠利多卡因凝胶给药):一项双盲、随机、对照和前瞻性研究。
目的:我们旨在评估经尿道麻醉剂对经直肠麻醉剂的有效性。方法:计划经直肠超声引导下对237例患者进行12核心前列腺活检。患者随机分为两组。第1组(n=113):仅经直肠2%利多卡因,第2组(n=124):在手术前10分钟给患者经直肠+经尿道(三明治)利多卡因凝胶作为麻醉。活检后,患者立即询问他在进针过程中感受到的疼痛程度。通过VAS评分衡量的评估。活检后立即对该程序的满意率,如果需要再次活检,则验收得分在1到4之间。两组进行了统计学比较。结果:第一组和第二组的VAS评分分别为4.88±1.89和3.77±1.83。第2组的疼痛程度低于第1组。两组之间的差异被认为具有统计学意义(P结论:在TRUS引导的前列腺活检中,三明治麻醉是一种廉价、方便、可耐受和有效的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital
Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
16.70%
发文量
41
期刊最新文献
An Analytical Comparison of Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma Patients Manifested with or without Graves' Disease. Can Galanin Be Used as a Marker of Microvascular Dysfunction in Prehypertensives? Can Laryngeal Mask Airway be the First Choice for Tracheal Stenosis Surgery? A Historical Cohort Study. Coexistence of Thyroglossal Cyst and Thyroid Disease in Adults: Surgical Outcomes From A Single Center. Comparative Analysis of Pain and Duration in Panretinal Photocoagulation: Navilas Laser versus Conventional Laser in Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1