Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate the pain scores and complications of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy and to compare lithotomy position (LP) versus left lateral decubitis position (LLDP). Methods: A total of 340 patients were referred for TRUS-guided biopsy. In group 1 (n = 170), biopsies were performed in LP (n = 170), and in group 2 (n = 170) biopsies were performed in LLDP (n = 170). In 68 patients, biopsies were repeated. We constituted two additional groups: in group 3 (n = 33) patients underwent biopsies in LP and LLDP, respectively, and in group 4 (n = 35) patients underwent biopsies in LLDP and LP, respectively. Pain score, infection rates, hematospermia, hematuria, rectal bleeding, and serious complications were compared between group 1 and group 2. Pain scores were compared between the four groups. Results: There were no differences between group 1 and group 2 for age, prostate volume, prostate-specific antigen level, biopsy time, hematuria, infection, hematospermia, and rectal bleeding. Pain scores were lower in group 2 than in group 1. Also, for LLDP, pain scores were lower in group 3 and group 4. Conclusion: The effect of position on pain scores in TRUS biopsy patients has not been previously described. Our study indicates that pain scale values are lower in LLDP than in LP.

Keywords:
Transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy, Lithotomy position, Left lateral decubitis position, Pain score, TRUS, complications, Prostate cancer
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
2007
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.