Lower Urinary Tract SymptomsNCT02856217
Impact of Tunneling During Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy
A study testing tunneling and non-tunneling in people with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Symptoms, run by The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston.
Trial summary
Pelvic organ prolapse occurs when the uterus or vaginal walls bulge into or beyond the vaginal introitus. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy is the most durable operation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse and serves as the criterion standard against which other operations are compared. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Symptoms
- What is being tested?
- tunneling and non-tunneling
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Aug 2016to 25 Sep 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Subject is female
- Subject is at least 18 years of age
- Subject is who can English speaking and reading
- Subject must have documented diagnosis of apical vaginal prolapse with leading edge of pelvic organ prolapse at or beyond the hymen. At or beyond the hymen is defined as Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) scores of C ≥ -1/2 total vaginal length (TVL)
- Subject reports a bothersome bulge they can see or feel per Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire - Short Form 20 (PFDI-20), question 3, response of 2 or higher (i.e., responses of "somewhat", "moderately", or "quite a bit")
- Subject or subject's legally authorized representative is willing to provide written informed consent
- Subject is willing and able to comply with the follow-up regimen
Who cannot join
- Subject is pregnant or intends to become pregnant during the study
- Subject has an active or chronic systemic infection including any gynecologic infection, untreated urinary tract infection (UTI) or tissue necrosis
- Subject has history of pelvic organ cancer (e.g. uterine, ovarian, bladder, or cervical)
- Subject has had prior or is currently undergoing radiation, laser therapy, or chemotherapy in the pelvic area
- Subject has taken systemic steroids (within the last month), or immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory treatment (within the last 3 months)
- Subject has systemic connective tissue disease (e.g. scleroderma, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Marfan's syndrome, Ehlers Danlos, collagenosis, polymyositis or polymyalgia rheumatica)
Show all 13Show fewer
- Subject has uncontrolled diabetes mellitus (DM)
- Subject has a known neurologic or medical condition affecting bladder function (e.g., multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury or stroke with residual neurologic deficit)
- Subject is seeking obliterative vaginal surgery as treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (colpocleisis)
- Subject is currently participating in or plans to participate in another device or drug study during this study
- Subject has a known sensitivity to polypropylene
- Subject has had previous prolapse repair with mesh (abdominal or vaginal)
- Subject is planning to undergo a concomitant vaginal repair with use of mesh
About this study
Official title: Comparison of the Tunneling or Non-tunneling During Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy in Terms of Lower Urinary Tract and Bowel Symptoms.
Pelvic organ prolapse occurs when the uterus or vaginal walls bulge into or beyond the vaginal introitus. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy is the most durable operation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse and serves as the criterion standard against which other operations are compared. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy involves attaching the vaginal apex to the sacral anterior longitudinal ligament reinforced with a graft, usually synthetic mesh. More than 225.000 surgeries are performed annually in the United States for pelvic organ prolapse. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy is considered the most durable pelvic organ prolapse surgery, but little is known about safety and long-term effectiveness.
Purpose of this study is to compare effect of tunneling or non-tunneling mesh placement on lower urinary tract symptoms and bowel symptoms in patients who underwent surgery with laparoscopic or robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy which is accepted surgical procedures for pelvic organ prolapse.
Read the detailed description
Pelvic organ prolapse represents a common female pelvic floor disorder that increases with age and has a serious impact on quality of life. It is estimated that 30% of women aged 50-89 years will seek consultation for pelvic floor disorders. The purpose of any surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse is to restore pelvic anatomy, preserving urinary, intestinal, and sexual function, with the lowest rate of recurrences and complications.
In the history of surgical repair for pelvic organ prolapse vaginal or abdominal approach has been performed. In spite of decreased morbidity and shorter hospitalisation advantage with vaginal procedures, they have consistently lower long-term success rates compared to abdominal sacrocolpopexy. In contrast, the abdominal approach is considered the gold standard for surgical correction of vaginal vault prolapse, with reported long-term efficacy rates. However, the associated morbidity of open laparotomy has made this procedure less favourable. In an effort to overcome these drawbacks, a minimally invasive laparoscopic approach has been adopted. However, the rigidity of the laparoscopic instrumentation makes intracorporeal suturing and dissection in the narrow pelvis challenging. Robot-assisted technology, with its stereoscopic vision and the use of instruments which easily moved by wrist movement, offers an ergonomic platform that simplifies complex laparoscopic tasks and has been widely adopted by pelvic surgeons.
Most complications following sacrocolpopexy can occur with either an open or a minimally invasive approach, typically at similar rates. Bladder injury, postoperative voiding dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms may occur. Lower urinary tract symptoms may develop postoperatively for reason that are still not clearly understood. De nova lower urinary tract symptoms may appear after laparoscopic or robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy with a range from 0% to 27%. As with urinary system complication, bowel complications (bowel injury, bowel dysfunction) may occur intraoperatively and postoperatively. Constipation is the mostly reported with a range from 0% to 19%. Retroperitonealization of the mesh used in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy or robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy is thought to reduce the risk of bowel injury, although some authors have noted a lack of bowel injuries when the mesh was left exposed to the peritoneum.
- Being tested
- tunneling, non-tunneling
- Medical subject headings
- Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
tunnelingProcedure or surgery
Also called Peritoneal tunneling during minimal invasive sacrocolpopexy
In this arm of the study which is Peritoneal tunneling group in SCP, standard minimal invasive sacrocolpopexy procedure will be performed. Placement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally (creating a tunnel between vaginal apex and sacrum under peritoneum without disturbing the integrity of the peritoneum)
non-tunnelingProcedure or surgery
Also called Peritoneal non-tunneling during minimal invasive SCP
In this arm of the study which is Peritoneal non-tunneling group in SCP, standard minimal invasive sacrocolpopexy procedure will be performed. Placement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally (incised and sutured peritoneum between vaginal apex and sacrum).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| tunneling | Active comparator | Placement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally placed in peritoneal tunneling in SCP: creating a tunnel between vaginal apex and sacrum under peritoneum without disturbing the integrity of the peritoneum. Receives: Procedure: tunneling |
| non-tunneling | Active comparator | Placement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally placed in peritoneal non-tunneling group in SCP: incised and sutured peritoneum between vaginal apex and sacrum Receives: Procedure: non-tunneling |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
In follow-up, using questionnaires specifically, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire - Short Form 20 will be used in preoperatively, in 2.week visit, 6.week visit and 12.months visit.
Measured: Up to 1 year
Secondary outcomes (7)
Pelvic Organ Prolapse
In follow-up, using questionnaires specifically, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire - Short Form 20 will be used in preoperatively, in 2.week visit, 6.week visit and 12.months visit.
Measured: Up to 1 year
Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Symptoms
In follow-up, using questionnaires specifically, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire - Short Form 20 will be used in preoperatively, in 2.week visit, 6.week visit and 12.months visit.
Measured: Up to 1 year
Surgical duration (time from skin incision to skin closure)
Outcome will be collected from patients operation files
Measured: Postoperative 1.day
Blood loss
Outcome will be collected from patients operation files and anesthesiology notes
Measured: Postoperative 1.day
Intraoperative complications (conversion to open procedure or inadvertent structural lesions such as bladder, bowel, vessels, or solid organs)
Outcome will be collected from patients operation files and prospectively will be noted from surgeon who is the PI of the study.
Measured: Postoperative 1.day
Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification)
The Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications questionnaires will be used to collect the complications
Measured: Postoperative 7.day
Sexual function
Evaluation of patient's sexual function with Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)
Measured: Up to 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Aug 2016 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2016
- Primary completionSep 2017
- Study completion25 Sep 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Lower Urinary Tract SymptomsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by The University of Texas Medical Branch, GalvestonThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Gokhan S Kilic, MD, Principal investigator, UTMB, Texas
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02856217
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 16-0157
- Status last verified
- Oct 2019
- First submitted
- 25 Jul 2016
- Last updated
- 10 Oct 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Glazener CM. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Apr 14;(4):CD004014. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub4.
PubMed 20393938Luber KM, Boero S, Choe JY. The demographics of pelvic floor disorders: current observations and future projections. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Jun;184(7):1496-501; discussion 1501-3. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.114868.
PubMed 11408873Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Apr;89(4):501-6. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00058-6.
PubMed 9083302Karram M, Goldwasser S, Kleeman S, Steele A, Vassallo B, Walsh P. High uterosacral vaginal vault suspension with fascial reconstruction for vaginal repair of enterocele and vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Dec;185(6):1339-42; discussion 1342-3. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.119077.
PubMed 11744906Benson JT, Lucente V, McClellan E. Vaginal versus abdominal reconstructive surgery for the treatment of pelvic support defects: a prospective randomized study with long-term outcome evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Dec;175(6):1418-21; discussion 1421-2. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70084-4.
PubMed 8987919Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, Zyczynski H; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Oct;104(4):805-23. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.07.
PubMed 15458906Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, Barret E, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, Vallancien G. The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol. 2009 May;55(5):1089-103. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.048. Epub 2009 Feb 4.
PubMed 19201521Rosenblum N. Robotic approaches to prolapse surgery. Curr Opin Urol. 2012 Jul;22(4):292-6. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e328354809c.
PubMed 22647648Lee RK, Mottrie A, Payne CK, Waltregny D. A review of the current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1128-37. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.064. Epub 2014 Jan 8.
PubMed 24433811Gadonneix P, Ercoli A, Salet-Lizee D, Cotelle O, Bolner B, Van Den Akker M, Villet R. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with two separate meshes along the anterior and posterior vaginal walls for multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004 Feb;11(1):29-35. doi: 10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60006-0.
PubMed 15104827
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Oct 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of the Tunneling or Non-tunneling During Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy in Terms of Lower Urinary Tract and Bowel Symptoms.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02856217
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 16-0157
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- The University of Texas Medical Branch, GalvestonUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Aug 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Sep 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 25 Sep 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Aug 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Pelvic organ prolapse occurs when the uterus or vaginal walls bulge into or beyond the vaginal introitus. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy is the most durable operation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse and serves as the criterion standard against which other operations are compared. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy involves attaching the vaginal apex to the sacral anterior longitudinal ligament reinforced with a graft, usually synthetic mesh. More than 225.000 surgeries are performed annually in the United States for pelvic organ prolapse. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy is considered the most durable pelvic organ prolapse surgery, but little is known about safety and long-term effectiveness.
Purpose of this study is to compare effect of tunneling or non-tunneling mesh placement on lower urinary tract symptoms and bowel symptoms in patients who underwent surgery with laparoscopic or robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy which is accepted surgical procedures for pelvic organ prolapse.
Detailed description
Pelvic organ prolapse represents a common female pelvic floor disorder that increases with age and has a serious impact on quality of life. It is estimated that 30% of women aged 50-89 years will seek consultation for pelvic floor disorders. The purpose of any surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse is to restore pelvic anatomy, preserving urinary, intestinal, and sexual function, with the lowest rate of recurrences and complications.
In the history of surgical repair for pelvic organ prolapse vaginal or abdominal approach has been performed. In spite of decreased morbidity and shorter hospitalisation advantage with vaginal procedures, they have consistently lower long-term success rates compared to abdominal sacrocolpopexy. In contrast, the abdominal approach is considered the gold standard for surgical correction of vaginal vault prolapse, with reported long-term efficacy rates. However, the associated morbidity of open laparotomy has made this procedure less favourable. In an effort to overcome these drawbacks, a minimally invasive laparoscopic approach has been adopted. However, the rigidity of the laparoscopic instrumentation makes intracorporeal suturing and dissection in the narrow pelvis challenging. Robot-assisted technology, with its stereoscopic vision and the use of instruments which easily moved by wrist movement, offers an ergonomic platform that simplifies complex laparoscopic tasks and has been widely adopted by pelvic surgeons.
Most complications following sacrocolpopexy can occur with either an open or a minimally invasive approach, typically at similar rates. Bladder injury, postoperative voiding dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms may occur. Lower urinary tract symptoms may develop postoperatively for reason that are still not clearly understood. De nova lower urinary tract symptoms may appear after laparoscopic or robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy with a range from 0% to 27%. As with urinary system complication, bowel complications (bowel injury, bowel dysfunction) may occur intraoperatively and postoperatively. Constipation is the mostly reported with a range from 0% to 19%. Retroperitonealization of the mesh used in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy or robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy is thought to reduce the risk of bowel injury, although some authors have noted a lack of bowel injuries when the mesh was left exposed to the peritoneum.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| tunneling | Active comparator | Procedure: tunnelingPlacement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally placed in peritoneal tunneling in SCP: creating a tunnel between vaginal apex and sacrum under peritoneum without disturbing the integrity of the peritoneum. |
| non-tunneling | Active comparator | Procedure: non-tunnelingPlacement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally placed in peritoneal non-tunneling group in SCP: incised and sutured peritoneum between vaginal apex and sacrum |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Subject is female
- Subject is at least 18 years of age
- Subject is who can English speaking and reading
- Subject must have documented diagnosis of apical vaginal prolapse with leading edge of pelvic organ prolapse at or beyond the hymen. At or beyond the hymen is defined as Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) scores of C ≥ -1/2 total vaginal length (TVL)
- Subject reports a bothersome bulge they can see or feel per Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire - Short Form 20 (PFDI-20), question 3, response of 2 or higher (i.e., responses of "somewhat", "moderately", or "quite a bit")
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Subject is pregnant or intends to become pregnant during the study
- Subject has an active or chronic systemic infection including any gynecologic infection, untreated urinary tract infection (UTI) or tissue necrosis
- Subject has history of pelvic organ cancer (e.g. uterine, ovarian, bladder, or cervical)
- Subject has had prior or is currently undergoing radiation, laser therapy, or chemotherapy in the pelvic area
- Subject has taken systemic steroids (within the last month), or immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory treatment (within the last 3 months)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| tunnelingAlso: Peritoneal tunneling during minimal invasive sacrocolpopexyIn this arm of the study which is Peritoneal tunneling group in SCP, standard minimal invasive sacrocolpopexy procedure will be performed. Placement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally (creating a tunnel between vaginal apex and sacrum under peritoneum without disturbing the integrity of the peritoneum) | Procedure or surgery | tunneling |
| non-tunnelingAlso: Peritoneal non-tunneling during minimal invasive SCPIn this arm of the study which is Peritoneal non-tunneling group in SCP, standard minimal invasive sacrocolpopexy procedure will be performed. Placement of mesh between vaginal apex and sacrum is retroperitoneally (incised and sutured peritoneum between vaginal apex and sacrum). | Procedure or surgery | non-tunneling |
Primary outcome
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
Time frame: Up to 1 year
In follow-up, using questionnaires specifically, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire - Short Form 20 will be used in preoperatively, in 2.week visit, 6.week visit and 12.months visit.
7 secondary outcomes
Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Time frame: Up to 1 year
Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Symptoms
Time frame: Up to 1 year
Surgical duration (time from skin incision to skin closure)
Time frame: Postoperative 1.day
Blood loss
Time frame: Postoperative 1.day
Intraoperative complications (conversion to open procedure or inadvertent structural lesions such as bladder, bowel, vessels, or solid organs)
Time frame: Postoperative 1.day
Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification)
Time frame: Postoperative 7.day
Sexual function
Time frame: Up to 1 year
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Oct 2019.
- Results publication: PubMed 20393938Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Glazener CM. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Apr 14;(4):CD004014. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub4.
- Results publication: PubMed 11408873Luber KM, Boero S, Choe JY. The demographics of pelvic floor disorders: current observations and future projections. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Jun;184(7):1496-501; discussion 1501-3. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.114868.
- Results publication: PubMed 9083302Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Apr;89(4):501-6. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00058-6.
- Results publication: PubMed 11744906Karram M, Goldwasser S, Kleeman S, Steele A, Vassallo B, Walsh P. High uterosacral vaginal vault suspension with fascial reconstruction for vaginal repair of enterocele and vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Dec;185(6):1339-42; discussion 1342-3. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.119077.
- Results publication: PubMed 8987919Benson JT, Lucente V, McClellan E. Vaginal versus abdominal reconstructive surgery for the treatment of pelvic support defects: a prospective randomized study with long-term outcome evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Dec;175(6):1418-21; discussion 1421-2. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70084-4.
- Results publication: PubMed 15458906Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, Zyczynski H; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Oct;104(4):805-23. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.07.
- Results publication: PubMed 19201521Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, Barret E, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, Vallancien G. The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol. 2009 May;55(5):1089-103. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.048. Epub 2009 Feb 4.
- Results publication: PubMed 22647648Rosenblum N. Robotic approaches to prolapse surgery. Curr Opin Urol. 2012 Jul;22(4):292-6. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e328354809c.
- Results publication: PubMed 24433811Lee RK, Mottrie A, Payne CK, Waltregny D. A review of the current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1128-37. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.064. Epub 2014 Jan 8.
- Results publication: PubMed 15104827Gadonneix P, Ercoli A, Salet-Lizee D, Cotelle O, Bolner B, Van Den Akker M, Villet R. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with two separate meshes along the anterior and posterior vaginal walls for multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004 Feb;11(1):29-35. doi: 10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60006-0.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
Recruiting
Safety and Performance of UCon Patch Electrode
Urinary Incontinence, Urinary Incontinence, Urge
Recruiting
Addressing Nocturia in Older Women Utilizing Behavioral Sleep Intervention and Brief Mindfulness
Nocturia, Insomnia
Active, not recruitingPhase 2/3
Examining the Effects of Intra-detrusor Botox at Time of HoLEP in Men With Overactive Bladder Symptoms
Urinary Incontinence, Overactive Bladder Syndrome
Recruiting
Rehabilitation and Sex Therapy to Optimize Recovery After Prostate Cancer Treatment
Prostate Cancer, Urinary Incontinence
Recruiting
UCon Treatment of Overactive Bladder (OAB) in Males
Urinary Incontinence, Urge Incontinence
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Gokhan S Kilic, MD principal investigator
UTMB, Texas
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing tunneling and non-tunneling in people with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Symptoms, run by The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 13 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Oct 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (time frame: Up to 1 year). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02856217, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 Oct 2019.