ArticleCentral European journal of urology2020
Comparative evaluation of bilateral pudendal nerve blockade and periprostatic nerve block in transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a prospective randomised trial.
Article in Central European journal of urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Comparison of pudendal and caudal nerve blocks for transrectal prostate biopsy in patients with anorectal disease A prospective, randomized trial.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough the periprostatic nerve block (PNB) is accepted as the standard method for local anesthesia prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy, it is not the most ideal method. We aimed to analyze the effectiveness and safety of bilateral pudendal nerve blockage (PuNB) by comparing with PNB. MATERIAL AND
methodsBetween June 2019 and October 2019, a total of 108 patients with elevated serum prostate specific antigen values (PSA ≥4 ng/ml) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings were included in the study. After exclusion criteria, the remaining 91 patients were randomly divided into two groups as PuNB (n = 46) and PNB (n = 45). Pain during local anesthesia application was recorded as a visual analog scale (VAS) 1, pain during placement of the rectal probe and manipulation was recorded as VAS 2 and pain during needle penetration into prostate tissue and sampling was recorded as VAS 3.
resultsNo significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to age, body mass index, serum PSA, prostate volume and prostate cancer rates. Mean VAS-2 score was significantly lower in the PuNB group when compared with the PNB group. There was no significant difference in terms of VAS-1 and VAS-3 scores. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of mild and severe complications.
conclusionsBoth techniques are safe for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy; however, PuNB provided more effective pain control compared to PNB especially during placement of rectal probe and manipulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.