RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To compare two different doses of lidocaine used for periprostatic nerve block on pain perception during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 288 patients with elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels and/or abnormal digital rectal examination who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy were included in the study. The patients were divided into 3 groups: Group 1 (n=103) prostate biopsy were performed after administering perianal intrarectal application of 10 mL 2% lidocaine gel, Group 2 (n=98) 2 mL of 2% lidocaine injection on each side following rectal installation of lidocaine gel and Group 3 (n=87) 4 mL of 2% lidocaine injection on each side after rectal instillation of lidocaine gel. Patients' pain scores during biopsy procedure were reported using visual analogue score (VAS). Independent sample t test, ANOVA test and Tukey test were used for statistical evaluation. RESULTS: The mean age, prostate volume and PSA level were 65.6±8.4 years, 58.2±34.8 mL, and 11.8±3.4 ng/mL respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. The mean VAS scores were 2.4±1.8 in Group 1, 2.5±1.9 in Group 2 and 1.6±1.6 in Group 3. Patients in Group 3, reported significant pain reduction compared with patients in Groups 1 and 2 (p=0.002, and 0.001, respectively). However, there was no statistically significant difference in VAS scores between Groups 1 and 2 (p=0.815). CONCLUSION: According to our results we recommend the use of perianal intrarectal lidocain gel application, and periprostatic nerve block with injection of 4 ml 2% lidocaine per side combination in TRUS-guided prostate biopsies. Further large-scale randomized control studies are needed to validate these finding.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine possible acute kidney injury with new marker neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) in urine and to show the relationship between changes of this marker and conventional markers in patients undergoing shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). METHODS: In patients with kidney stones, serum urea, creatinine, urine microalbumin, and NGAL levels were determined before SWL and at the first, second, and seventh days after SWL. In addition, patients who had undergone SWL were evaluated with Technetium-99m (Tc99m)-dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) and Tc99m-diethylenetriaminepenta acetate renal scintigraphy 1 week before and 3 months after SWL. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Forty patients were included in the study. All patients had a single stone in the kidney with an average size of 9.25 mm (range 5-15). No statistical change was found in the levels of average serum urea and creatinine levels, urine microglobulin, and NGAL levels, which were measured before SWL and after SWL. No significant difference was identified in urine NGAL and microalbumin levels of the groups, which were separated by shock wave number and shock energy amount on the first, second, and seventh days after SWL. In the high-energy SWL group, 3 patients had a statistical decrease in their differential kidney function measured with Tc99m difference between differential function rates of the kidney before and after SWL (DMSA) after 3 months after SWL. CONCLUSION: Our study found that, using both new and conventional parameters in the acute stage and 3 months later, SWL treatment does not cause acute kidney damage.