(082) EFFICACY OF EMLA CREAM FOR OFFICE-BASED ANDROLOGY PROCEDURE UNDER LOCAL ANESTHETIC: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction There has been an increasing number of office base urology procedure performed under local anesthesia (LA), although it can be associated with needle phobia and pain. EMLA (Eutectic Mixture of Local Anesthetic) is a topical anesthetic cream that is used in office-based urology procedures. However, its use in more involved/invasive andrology and male-infertility procedures such as hydrocelectomy, spermatocelectomy, and others remain poorly studied. Objective We hypothesized that pre-application of EMLA cream in office-based andrology and male-infertility procedures may provide better pain control and overall experience for patients. Methods A double-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted for patients undergoing scrotal andrology surgeries under LA. Power calculation was performed with an estimated sample size of 72. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to topical EMLA + LA vs LA alone. In the post-operative recovery area, patient will be asked to complete a VAS questionnaire rating pain with LA administration and pain with procedure. Analysis comparing VAS pain scores of both groups was performed using the independent sample t-test method. Results 72 patients were included in our analysis, with 36 in the control and 36 in the intervention arm. For patient pain with administration of LA, the control arm reported an average VAS pain score of 4.31, compared to 3.72 in the intervention arm (p = 0.319). For patient pain with procedure, patients in the control arm reported a median VAS pain score of 3.47 compared to 3.03 (p = 0.432) in the intervention arm. Overall, 86% (62/72) of patients reported that they would either be “very likely” (4/5) or “highly likely” (5/5) to undergo future procedures under local anesthetic. Conclusions Performing scrotal surgeries under LA appears to be well tolerated and feasible option. Pre-application of EMLA cream does not appear to significantly patient reported outcomes. Disclosure Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Boston Scientific.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".