• Roman Szlauer, Robert Gotschl, Andrea Gnad, Phillip Meissner, Ljiljana Paras, Nikolaus T Schmeller, and Klaus G Fink.
• Department of Urology and Andrology, Paracelsus Medizinische Privatuniversitat, Landeskliniken Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. r.szlauer@salk.at
• Urol. Int. 2008 Jan 1;80(3):253-6.

AbstractThe aim of this randomized prospective and partially double-blind study was to evaluate the efficacy of transrectal lidocaine applied as suppositories in comparison to periprostatic infiltration as methods of reducing pain during transrectal prostate biopsy. 100 patients were randomized to four groups and received either a suppository containing 60 mg of lidocaine 2 h before biopsy, a 120-mg lidocaine suppository 1 h before biopsy, a 120-mg lidocaine suppository 2 h before biopsy, or they were anaesthetized with a periprostatic infiltration of 5 ml 2% lidocaine. In all patients the same 10-core transrectal biopsy technique was performed. Pain was evaluated using a visual pain scale ranging from 0 to 10 points. The mean pain score in the 60-mg (2 h), 120-mg (1 h), and 120-mg (2 h) lidocaine suppository groups was 3.63, 3.56, and 3.58 respectively. The mean pain score of patients receiving periprostatic infiltration was 1.80. No patient showed vegetative symptoms like sweating or hypotonia. No patient had severe pain. Eight of the 9 patients with no pain were in the periprostatic injection group. Thus, all lidocaine suppositories showed a good analgesic effect although a significantly better pain reduction was achieved by periprostatic lidocaine infiltration.2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

20 keywords...

hide…