Comparison of different local anesthesia techniques during TRUS-guided biopsies: a prospective pilot study.

What Was Tested

This randomized controlled trial looks at Dimethyl Sulfoxide and Lidocaine.

To introduce two forms of anesthesia and compare them with standard local anesthesia techniques.

One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the data scale among the four groups.

Who Took Part

The study group was 114 patients.

The age groups tagged for this paper are middle-aged adults and older adults, men only.

A total of 114 consecutive patients underwent prostate needle biopsy.

How the Study Was Run

In design terms this was a randomized and pilot study.

The patients were allocated by chance, so the Dimethyl Sulfoxide group and the comparison group should start out alike.

It is described as a pilot, a small early test of whether a larger Dimethyl Sulfoxide study would be practical.

Pain perception was separately assessed for probe insertion and biopsies using a visual pain analog score.

A linear regression model was used to define the independent variables that predicted the level of pain.

What Was Measured

Topics PubMed links to this paper include Adenocarcinoma, Adjuvants, Anesthesia, Administration, Rectal, Anesthesia, Local, Anesthetics, Local, Biomarkers, Tumor and Biopsy, Needle.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized and pilot study of Dimethyl Sulfoxide and Lidocaine in 114 patients.

Its findings take up roughly 7 sentences of the abstract and are left out here on purpose; the source paper is the place to read them.

The publication is from 2005 (Urology), a journal based in United States.

More context: the related DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide, non-peptide solvent) library page, all human trials.