Combined intrarectal lidocaine gel and periprostatic nerve block: A 'balanced' anaesthesia for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Periprostatic nerve block (PNB) which appears to be the gold standard for pain relief during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (TrusP) biopsy has been proven to be lacking in providing satisfactory anaesthesia during transrectal ultrasound (Trus) probe insertion into the anorectum necessitating the addition of another technique to produce a 'balanced' anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to determine whether combined intrarectal lidocaine gel and periprostatic nerve block (cGPNB) will provide adequate anaesthesia at all stages of TrusP compared with caudal block (CB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were prospectively collected from patients with indications for TrusP who were randomly assigned to either cGPNB (Group A) or CB (Group B). Comparative analysis of the numerical rating pain score (NRS) between two groups was done after administration of anaesthesia, Trus probe insertion, biopsy needle puncture of the prostate and 1 h after biopsy. RESULTS: There were 56 patients in Group A and 53 in Group B. There was no significant difference in NRS grouping between the two arms of the study after administration of anaesthesia (P = 0.93), biopsy needle puncture of the prostate (P = 0.28) and 1 h after the procedure (P = 0.39). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of patients with no/mild pain between the two arms of the study during probe insertion (P = 0.65). None of the patients in both arms of the study had severe pain. Across Group A and B, 35 (62.5%) versus 40 (75.5%), 20 (35.7%) versus 11 (20.8%) and 1 (1.8%) versus 2 (3.8%) adjudged the procedure as very tolerable, fairly tolerable and intolerable respectively (P = 0.20). All the patients in Group A versus 49 (92.5%) in Group B will choose the same anaesthesia for subsequent biopsies (P = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: cGPNB provides balanced anaesthesia at all stages of TrusP with excellent patient tolerability.

Bilateral subcapsular orchiectomy versus bilateral total orchiectomy: Comparison of the quality of life post-orchiectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Bilateral subcapsular orchiectomy (BSO) is said to be more aesthetic and psychologically satisfying when compared to bilateral total orchiectomy (BTO). This study compared the quality of life (QoL) of men with advanced prostate cancer who had BTO to those who had BSO, with an emphasis on their perception of self or identity as a man. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Sixty-one patients with advanced prostate cancer opting for bilateral orchiectomy were recruited. Pre-orchiectomy and at 1 month and 3 months post-orchiectomy, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Prostate cancer (FACT-P) questionnaires were administered and scored. RESULTS: Thirty (49.18%) patients had BTO (BTO group), while 31 (50.82%) patients had BSO (BSO group) for advanced prostate cancer. On comparison of the two groups, there were no statistically significant differences in FACT-P scores at 1 month and 3 months. The subscale scores also showed no significant statistical difference except for the physical well-being score at 3 months post-orchiectomy, which was lower in the BSO group (P = 0.041). The average scores of Item P5 (I am able to feel like a man) which were used to assess the sex-role identity declined on an average over 3 months with no statistically significant difference on comparison of the two groups. CONCLUSION: The QoL scores (FACT-P and FACT-G) assessed over 3 months post-orchiectomy did not differ on comparison of the BTO group and the BSO group. Performing a BSO in our region did not result in any psychological benefit when compared to performing a BTO.