首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Pain Research >Local anesthesia for pain control during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Local anesthesia for pain control during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:经直肠超声引导下前列腺穿刺活检期间局部麻醉以控制疼痛:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intrarectal local anesthestic (IRLA), periprostatic nerve block (PPNB), and the combined modalities in alleviating the pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. Materials and methods: A literature review was performed to identify all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about IRLA vs no anesthesia or placebo gel; PPNB vs no injection, periprostatic placebo injection, or IRLA; combined PPNB and IRLA vs PPNB alone; and combined PPNB and intraprostatic nerve block (IPNB) vs PPNB alone before TRUS-guided biopsy. Sources included MEDILINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from 1980 to 2016. The main outcomes were biopsy pain score, probe manipulation pain score, and anesthetic infiltration pain score assessed by the visual pain scale. Results: A total of 26 articles involving 36 RCTs were used in this analysis: Although IRLA can lead to pain reduction, the result was not statistically significant when compared with no anesthesia or placebo gel (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.22, 95% CI: -0.45 to?0, P =0.06). PPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with no analgesia (WMD: -1.32, 95% CI: -1.68 to -0.95, P <0.00001), placebo injection (WMD: -2.62, 95% CI: -3.16 to -2.07, P <0.00001), or IRLA (WMD: -1.31, 95% CI: -1.40 to -1.22, P <0.00001). PPNB + IRLA can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.45, 95% CI: -0.62 to -0.28, P <0.00001). PPNB + IPNB can lead to significantly lower biopsy pain scores when compared with PPNB alone (WMD: -0.73, 95% CI: -0.92 to -0.55, P <0.00001). There were no severe reported general or local complications related to local anesthesia. Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicates that a combination of PPNB and IRLA/IPNB is effective and safe in alleviating the pain during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to validate this result.
机译:背景:进行了荟萃分析,以评估直肠内局部麻醉剂(IRLA),前列腺周围神经阻滞(PPNB)以及联合方式在经直肠超声(TRUS)指导的前列腺活检中减轻疼痛的有效性和安全性。材料和方法:进行文献综述以鉴定所有已发表的关于IRLA与无麻醉或安慰剂凝胶的随机对照试验(RCT)。 PPNB与不注射,前列腺周围注射安慰剂或IRLA; PPNB和IRLA的组合与单独使用PPNB的组合;并在TRUS引导的活检之前将PPNB和前列腺内神经阻滞(IPNB)相对于单独PPNB进行比较。资料来源包括1980年至2016年的MEDILINE,EMBASE和Cochrane库。主要结果是活检疼痛评分,探针操作疼痛评分和通过视觉疼痛量表评估的麻醉浸润疼痛评分。结果:本分析共使用26篇涉及36个RCT的文章:尽管IRLA可以减轻疼痛,但与无麻醉或安慰剂凝胶相比,结果无统计学意义(加权平均差异[WMD]:-0.22、95 %CI:-0.45至≤0,P = 0.06)。与不使用镇痛药相比(WMD:-1.32,95%CI:-1.68至-0.95,P <0.00001),安慰剂注射(WMD:-2.62,95%CI:-3.16至90),PPNB可以显着降低活检疼痛评分。 -2.07,P <0.00001)或IRLA(WMD:-1.31,95%CI:-1.40至-1.22,P <0.00001)。与单独使用PPNB相比,PPNB + IRLA可显着降低活检疼痛评分(WMD:-0.45,95%CI:-0.62至-0.28,P <0.00001)。与单独使用PPNB相比,PPNB + IPNB可显着降低活检疼痛评分(WMD:-0.73,95%CI:-0.92至-0.55,P <0.00001)。没有严重报道与局部麻醉有关的全身或局部并发症。结论:这项荟萃分析表明,PPNB和IRLA / IPNB的组合在缓解TRUS引导的前列腺活检过程中的疼痛方面是安全有效的。需要进一步的高质量RCT来验证该结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号