Pelvic Organ ProlapseNCT05422209
The Influence of Simultaneous Posterior Colporrhaphy and Perineoplasty on the Efficiency and Safety of Mesh-augmented Sacrospinal Fixation (Apical Sling) in Advanced POP Repair.
A study testing Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. and Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. in people with Pelvic Organ Prolapse, run by Saint Petersburg State University, Russia at 1 site in Russia.
Trial summary
This is a prospective randomized controlled study, designed to assess the influence of posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty performed simultaneously with mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation (apical sling) in advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 45 to 80 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse
- What is being tested?
- Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. and Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy.
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 310 participants
- Where
- 1 siteRussia
- Study dates
- 9 Sep 2022to 9 May 2025
- 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 45 to 80 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- The age of a subject is 45 to 80 years.
- Leading point of prolapse is at the level of the hymen or distal to the hymen (Ba, C>=0 according to POP-Q classification)
- Patient's ability to read and sign the informed consent form.
- Socialized patient who is able to fill in validated questionnaires and arrive for control postoperative examination in future.
- Patient's consent for participation in the study.
Who cannot join
- The subject has presence of oncologic disease which was diagnosed earlier or is active now.
- The subject had prior surgery for POP, SUI or hysterectomy
- The subject has gynecological deseases (recurrent uterine bleeding, endometrial hyperplasia, the presence of atypical cells in cervical smears, adenomyosis, multiple uterine myoma)
- The subject has urinary incontinence
- The subject is planning pregnancy
- The subject has an active urinary tract infection or skin infection in the region of surgery or acute infectious desease
Show all 10Show fewer
- The subject is unable to visit postoperative check-ups
- Refusal from participation.
- Bp > C according to POP-Q system.
- gh < 4 cm and > 6 cm according to POP-Q system.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Russia1 site
Saint-Petersburg State University Hospital
Saint Petersburg, 190103
About this study
Official title: The Influence of Simultaneous Posterior Colporrhaphy and Perineoplasty on the Efficiency and Safety of Mesh-augmented Sacrospinal Fixation (Apical Sling) in Advanced POP Repair. Randomized Controlled Study.
This is a prospective randomized controlled study, designed to assess the influence of posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty performed simultaneously with mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation (apical sling) in advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair.
Read the detailed description
BACKGROUND Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is revealed by the gynecological examination in 40-60 % of parous women. A pelvic floor defect is represented by cystocele almost in a half of cases. At the same time it is known that just the loss of apical support favors going out of the anterior vaginal wall beyond the hymen. Today the vast majority of specialists share one view that the uterus with its sacral-uterine-cardinal ligament complex is a key element for the reliable support of the pelvic floor. It is also considered that perineal body insufficiency promotes the development of POP because the small pelvic organs do not have support on which they could lie. The perineal body is a part of the support level III according to DeLancey. Hiatus enlargement is associated with damage of the elevator muscle of anus and one of the factors for POP development both at a clinical examination and ultrasound scanning. Perineoplasty is one of the methods for correction of hiatus opening and anatomical perineal body insufficiency. An important aspect in POP surgery consists in prevention of a recurrence after the surgical treatment. It is important to mention that today there are no randomized studies comparing the efficiency of transvaginal pelvic floor reconstruction using a mesh for apical fixation with and without the recovery of the support level 3 according to DeLancey. Thus, understanding of mechanisms for prevention of repeated surgeries is fundamental and essential for successful treatment of POP.
PREOPERATIVE ASSESSMENT All patients who meet eligibility criteria will undergo a preoperative assessment: medical history, physical and vaginal examination, assessing pelvic organ prolapse according to Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q). All patients will complete questionnaires validated in Russia: Pelvic Floor Disability Index (PFDI-20), Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, short form (PISQ-SF), Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I).
MATERIALS AND METHODS Our hypothesis is that posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty performed simultaneously with mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation reduces POP recurrence in any compartment.
Taking into account the available data on frequency of recurrences after unilateral sacrospinal fixation according to hybrid technology (7.4 %) and also clinical observation on frequency of recurrences after three-level hybrid reconstruction (1 %), study power of 80 %, significance level of 5 %, 282 patients are necessary to confirm an expected difference in frequency of recurrences. In order to compensate data losses, the calculated sample size was increased by 10 %. As a result, the total sample size is 310 patients.
All enrolled patients will be randomly assigned to mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy or sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty treatment groups in equal ratio the day before the surgery, using computer randomization.
All data will be collected by medical staff not involved in treatment. Collected pre- and postoperative data will be anonymized using unique codes, that patients will receive immediately after randomization.
All surgical interventions will be performed by 4 qualified surgeons. Postoperative follow-up will be performed 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery by 2 researchers, who will be blinded about the type of intervention.
- Conditions
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse
- Being tested
- Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty., Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy.
- Keywords
- pelvic organ prolapse, vaginal repair, vaginal mesh, sacrospinous fixation, colporrhaphy, perineoplasty
- Medical subject headings
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty.Procedure or surgery
Vaginal mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty.
Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy.Procedure or surgery
Vaginal mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Procedure: Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. |
| Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Procedure: Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Objective cure rate
The patient is considered cured if there is no prolapse beyond the hymen and the cervix is above -1 cm according to POP-Q (0-1 stage)
Measured: 24 months (2 years)
Secondary outcomes (4)
Satisfaction with the surgery
Measured through the Patient Global Impression of Improvement questionnaire (PGI-I), validated in Russia. The patient marks the number that best describes her post-operative condition, compared with how it was before surgery. The score ranges from 1 (very much better) to 7 (very much worse).
Measured: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
The impact of treatment on sexual function
Measured through the scoring of Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) validated in Russia. The scale evaluates sexual function in patients with urinary incontinence and/or POP. The responses are graded on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (always) to 4 (never). Items 1 - 4 are reversely scored and a total of 48 is the maximum score. The higher scores indicate better sexual function.
Measured: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
The impact of treatment on the quality of life
Measured through the Pelvic Floor Disability Index (PFDI-20), validated in Russia. The item includes 20 questions. The score ranges from 0 to 300. The higher the score, the worse the outcome.
Measured: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
Observed complications
Presence of any adverse effects such as: bleeding requiring blood transfusion, haematoma, organ perforation, nerve injury, vaginal scarring and shortening, wound infection, urinary tract infection, pelvic pain, mesh extrusion in the vagina, mesh erosion into the urinary tract, dyspareunia de novo, de novo urgency, atonic bladder, de novo stress urinary incontinence
Measured: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Jun 2022
- Study start9 Sep 2022
- Primary completion9 Mar 2024
- Study completion9 May 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pelvic Organ ProlapseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 310 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Saint Petersburg State University, Russia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Shkarupa Dmitry, Saint Petersburg State University, Russia
- Investigators
- Dmitry Shkarupa, MD, PhD, Study chair, Saint Petersburg State University, Russia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05422209
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SSF and perineoplasty
- Status last verified
- Jul 2024
- First submitted
- 18 May 2022
- Last updated
- 3 Jul 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Shakhaliev RA, Shulgin AS, Kubin ND, Kondratiev AS, Suchkov DA, Neklasova SV, Shkarupa DD. The influence of simultaneous posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty on the efficiency and safety of mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation (apical sling) in advanced POP repair. Trials. 2024 Oct 2;25(1):647. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08448-4.
PubMed 39358750
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Jul 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Influence of Simultaneous Posterior Colporrhaphy and Perineoplasty on the Efficiency and Safety of Mesh-augmented Sacrospinal Fixation (Apical Sling) in Advanced POP Repair. Randomized Controlled Study.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05422209
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SSF and perineoplasty
- Conditions
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse
- Keywords
- pelvic organ prolapse, vaginal repair, vaginal mesh, sacrospinous fixation, colporrhaphy, perineoplasty
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 310 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Saint Petersburg State University, RussiaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 9 Sep 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 9 Mar 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 9 May 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 16 Jun 2022 (actual)
- 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.
This is a prospective randomized controlled study, designed to assess the influence of posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty performed simultaneously with mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation (apical sling) in advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair.
Detailed description
BACKGROUND Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is revealed by the gynecological examination in 40-60 % of parous women. A pelvic floor defect is represented by cystocele almost in a half of cases. At the same time it is known that just the loss of apical support favors going out of the anterior vaginal wall beyond the hymen. Today the vast majority of specialists share one view that the uterus with its sacral-uterine-cardinal ligament complex is a key element for the reliable support of the pelvic floor. It is also considered that perineal body insufficiency promotes the development of POP because the small pelvic organs do not have support on which they could lie. The perineal body is a part of the support level III according to DeLancey. Hiatus enlargement is associated with damage of the elevator muscle of anus and one of the factors for POP development both at a clinical examination and ultrasound scanning. Perineoplasty is one of the methods for correction of hiatus opening and anatomical perineal body insufficiency. An important aspect in POP surgery consists in prevention of a recurrence after the surgical treatment. It is important to mention that today there are no randomized studies comparing the efficiency of transvaginal pelvic floor reconstruction using a mesh for apical fixation with and without the recovery of the support level 3 according to DeLancey. Thus, understanding of mechanisms for prevention of repeated surgeries is fundamental and essential for successful treatment of POP.
PREOPERATIVE ASSESSMENT All patients who meet eligibility criteria will undergo a preoperative assessment: medical history, physical and vaginal examination, assessing pelvic organ prolapse according to Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q). All patients will complete questionnaires validated in Russia: Pelvic Floor Disability Index (PFDI-20), Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, short form (PISQ-SF), Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I).
MATERIALS AND METHODS Our hypothesis is that posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty performed simultaneously with mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation reduces POP recurrence in any compartment.
Taking into account the available data on frequency of recurrences after unilateral sacrospinal fixation according to hybrid technology (7.4 %) and also clinical observation on frequency of recurrences after three-level hybrid reconstruction (1 %), study power of 80 %, significance level of 5 %, 282 patients are necessary to confirm an expected difference in frequency of recurrences. In order to compensate data losses, the calculated sample size was increased by 10 %. As a result, the total sample size is 310 patients.
All enrolled patients will be randomly assigned to mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy or sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty treatment groups in equal ratio the day before the surgery, using computer randomization.
All data will be collected by medical staff not involved in treatment. Collected pre- and postoperative data will be anonymized using unique codes, that patients will receive immediately after randomization.
All surgical interventions will be performed by 4 qualified surgeons. Postoperative follow-up will be performed 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery by 2 researchers, who will be blinded about the type of intervention.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. | Active comparator | Procedure: Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. |
| Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. | Active comparator | Procedure: Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 45 to 80 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- The age of a subject is 45 to 80 years.
- Leading point of prolapse is at the level of the hymen or distal to the hymen (Ba, C>=0 according to POP-Q classification)
- Patient's ability to read and sign the informed consent form.
- Socialized patient who is able to fill in validated questionnaires and arrive for control postoperative examination in future.
- Patient's consent for participation in the study.
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- The subject has presence of oncologic disease which was diagnosed earlier or is active now.
- The subject had prior surgery for POP, SUI or hysterectomy
- The subject has gynecological deseases (recurrent uterine bleeding, endometrial hyperplasia, the presence of atypical cells in cervical smears, adenomyosis, multiple uterine myoma)
- The subject has urinary incontinence
- The subject is planning pregnancy
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty.Vaginal mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. | Procedure or surgery | Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. |
| Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy.Vaginal mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. | Procedure or surgery | Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. |
Primary outcome
Objective cure rate
Time frame: 24 months (2 years)
The patient is considered cured if there is no prolapse beyond the hymen and the cervix is above -1 cm according to POP-Q (0-1 stage)
4 secondary outcomes
Satisfaction with the surgery
Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
The impact of treatment on sexual function
Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
The impact of treatment on the quality of life
Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
Observed complications
Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Jul 2024.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39358750Shakhaliev RA, Shulgin AS, Kubin ND, Kondratiev AS, Suchkov DA, Neklasova SV, Shkarupa DD. The influence of simultaneous posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty on the efficiency and safety of mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation (apical sling) in advanced POP repair. Trials. 2024 Oct 2;25(1):647. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08448-4.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Return to Physical Activity After Retropublic Transvaginal Sling and Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy
Stress Urinary Incontinence, Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Active, not recruitingObservational study
i-Stitch for Bilateral Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation (SSLF)
Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Genital Prolapse
Recruiting
Safety and Performance of a Pelvic Floor Mesh Implant for Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy (ProGYNious)
Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP), Synthetic Mesh
Recruiting
Pelvic Floor Muscle Training During Pregnancy
Urinary Incontinence, Anal Incontinence
Not yet recruiting
Perineal Protection Device for Reducing Perineal Trauma During Vaginal Delivery in First-time Mothers: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, Perineal Laceration
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.
Dmitry Shkarupa, MD, PhD study chair
Saint Petersburg State University, Russia
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy and perineoplasty. and Mesh-augmented sacrospinal fixation with posterior colporrhaphy. in people with Pelvic Organ Prolapse, run by Saint Petersburg State University, Russia at 1 site in Russia.
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 5 inclusion and 10 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Jul 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Russia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
Results are not available in the source record.
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?
Objective cure rate (time frame: 24 months (2 years)). 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 NCT05422209, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 3 Jul 2024.