What is the most effective local anesthesia for transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of 47 randomized clinical trials.

We aimed to compare the effectiveness of various local anesthetic methods for controlling prostate biopsy (PBx) related pain using network meta-analysis. Literature searches were performed on PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to March 2018. Forty-seven randomized controlled trials, in which the effectiveness of PBx-related pain was investigated using a visual analogue scale after various local anesthetic methods, were included. The local anesthetic methods included intraprostatic local anesthesia (IPLA), intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA), intravenous sedation (IVS), periprostatic nerve block (PNB), pelvic plexus block (PPB), and spinal anesthesia (SPA). Eight pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses with 21 comparisons were performed. All modalities, except single use of IPLA and IRLA, were more effective than placebo. Our results demonstrate that PNB + IVS (rank 1) and SPA (rank 2) were the most effective methods for pain control. The followings are in order of PPB + IRLA, PNB + IPLA, PPB, PNB + IRLA, IVS, and PNB. In conclusion, the most effective way to alleviate PBx-related pain appears to be PNB + IVS and SPA. However, a potential increase in medical cost and additional risk of morbidities should be considered. In the current outpatient setting, PPB + IRLA, PNB + IPLA, PPB, PNB + IRLA, and PNB methods are potentially more acceptable options.

Effects of age and comorbidity on survival vary according to risk grouping among patients with prostate cancer treated using radical prostatectomy: A retrospective competing-risk analysis from the K-CaP registry.

A multicenter Korean Prostate Cancer Database (K-CaP) has been established to provide information regarding Korean patients with prostate cancer (PCa). We used the K-CaP registry to investigate the value of age and comorbidity for predicting cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) according to risk grouping.The K-CaP registry includes 2253 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between May 2001 and April 2013 at 5 institutions. Preoperative clinicopathologic data were collected and stratified according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk criteria. Survival was evaluated using Gray's modified log-rank test according to risk category, age (<70 years vs ≥70 years), and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (0 vs ≥1).The median follow-up was 55.0 months (interquartile range: 42.0-70.0 months). Competing-risk regression analysis revealed that, independent of CCI, ≥70-year-old high-risk patients had significantly greater CSM than <70-year-old high-risk patients (P = .019). However, <70-year-old high-risk patients with a CCI of ≥1 had similar CSM relative to ≥70-year-old patients. Survival was not affected by age or CCI among low-risk or intermediate-risk patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that a CCI of ≥1 was independently associated with a higher risk of CSM (P = .003), while an age of ≥70 years was independently associated with a higher risk of OCM (P = .005).Age and comorbidity were associated with survival after RP among patients with high-risk PCa, although these associations were not observed among low-risk or intermediate-risk patients. Therefore, older patients with high-risk diseases and greater comorbidity may require alternative multidisciplinary treatment.