Preventing pain during office biopsy of the prostate: a single center, prospective, double-blind, 3-arm, parallel group, randomized clinical trial.

Journal Article (Clinical Trial;Journal Article)

BACKGROUND: A prospective, double-blind, 3-arm, parallel group, randomized clinical trial was performed to compare 3 anesthetic techniques for preventing pain during prostate biopsy. METHODS: A total of 243 men undergoing a 12-core prostate biopsy were randomized to 1 of 3 anesthetic methods: 1) seminal vesical-prostatic base blockade, 2) intraprostatic blockade, and 3) apical-rectal blockade. Pain was estimated with the 10-point visual analog scale. Multivariate logistic regression evaluated factors predictive of pain. The Kruskal-Wallis test analyzed overall group comparisons and the Steel-Dwass test assessed between-group comparisons in pain scores. Proportional odds ordinal logistic regression quantified the ability of covariates and treatment arms to predict biopsy pain. These values are presented as odds ratios with confidence intervals (OR, 95% CI). RESULTS: From November 2005 to June 2006, 81 men were randomized to 3 study arms. Lidocaine administration was the most painful element of the procedure, while probe insertion was the least. Apical biopsies were routinely more painful than mid-gland biopsies, which were more painful than base biopsies. The apical-rectal blockade was the most painful to administer, but has lasting effects and led to better pain control than the prostatic base-seminal vesicle blockade. Similarly, the intraprostatic blockade was more effective than the prostatic base-seminal vesicle blockade. Besides pain reported at the time of anesthetic injection, no difference was identified between the intraprostatic and apical-rectal blockades. CONCLUSIONS: Mid and apical biopsies of the prostate are more painful than base biopsies. The seminal vesicle-prostatic base blockade is less effective than intraprostatic and apical-rectal blockade at controlling pain.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Ashley, RA; Inman, BA; Routh, JC; Krambeck, AE; Siddiqui, SA; Mynderse, LA; Gettman, MT; Blute, ML

Published Date

  • October 15, 2007

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 110 / 8

Start / End Page

  • 1708 - 1714

PubMed ID

  • 17724727

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 0008-543X

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1002/cncr.22973


  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States