RESUMO
PURPOSE: To determine whether intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA) with heated lidocaine gel provides pain reduction during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. METHODS: We conducted a randomized-controlled study with 153 participants who underwent TRUS-guided, systematic 12-core prostate biopsy from May 2018 to June 2019. These participants were divided into three test groups. Before prostate biopsy, group A (51 patients) received no local anesthesia, group B (51 patients) received IRLA with 20 mL 2% lidocaine gel stored at room temperature, and group C (51 patients) received IRLA with heated (40 â) 20 mL 2% lidocaine gel. Pain was assessed using the 0-10 visual analogue scale (VAS) at three time points: VAS-1: during probe insertion, VAS-2: during biopsy, VAS-3: 30 min after the procedure. Complications during and after the procedure were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean VAS-2 score was significantly lower in group C compared to groups A and B (A, 4.6; B, 4.2; and C, 3.2; p < 0.05). There was no significant difference among the three groups in mean VAS-1 and VAS-3 scores. No significant difference was detected in incidence of complications between the three groups. No allergic reactions to lidocaine gel were observed. CONCLUSION: IRLA with heated lidocaine gel provides more effective pain control during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy than does conventional IRLA and no local anesthesia, without an increase of complications.
Assuntos
Anestésicos Locais/administração & dosagem , Lidocaína/administração & dosagem , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção , Idoso , Biópsia com Agulha de Grande Calibre , Géis , Temperatura Alta , Humanos , Masculino , Medição da Dor , Estudos Prospectivos , República da CoreiaRESUMO
Purpose: We aimed to analyze the incidence and prevalence of urolithiasis in Korea over the last decade using the National Health Insurance (NHI) sample cohort data. Materials and Methods: From January 2002 to December 2013, we enrolled sample cohort data from the NHI. Patients diagnosed with international classification of diseases code N20 or N13.2 were included. The incidence and prevalence rate was counted from the same period and patients previously diagnosed with urolithiasis were excluded. We compared the incidence and prevalence of urolithiasis by region, age, and sex, and identified the changes. Results: Total 1,111,828 subjects were included. Of these subjects, 36,857 had urolithiasis. The male-to-female ratio was 1.57:1, and total incidence rate was 3.27 per 1,000 person-years (1,000p-yrs). The annual incidence was lowest in 2013 (3,138 patients) and highest in 2005 (3,751 patients). Incidence rate by diagnostic code was highest in ureter stone only (2.49 per 1,000p-yrs) and was lowest in kidney and ureter stone both (0.17 per 1,000p-yrs). Prevalence gradually increased from 3,172 in 2002 and 5,758 in 2013. Jeollanam-do had the highest incidence rate of 3.70 persons per 1,000p-yrs, and Jeju had the lowest rate of 2.84 persons per 1,000p-yrs. In gender analysis, Daegu had the highest incidence (4.56) in males, Jeollanam-do had the highest incidence (3.20) in females. Conclusions: Annual incidence remained stable, whereas prevalence gradually increased. The incidence in male was 1.57 times higher than female, and the peak incidence age was 45-49 years, with the highest incidence occurring in Jeollanam-do and the lowest in Jeju.