ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03400007Updated Jul 19, 2022

Clinical and Dynamic Floor MRI Evaluation Before and After Prolapse Surgery

An observational study in Prolapse, sponsored by Tatiana Besse-Hammer. Completed at 2 sites in Belgium. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-07-19.

Sponsored by Tatiana Besse-Hammer · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
34
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Pelvic organ prolapsed, associated with defecation disorders and urinary tracts symptoms are common and affect up to 25% of the population, mostly parous women. The pelvic floor must be seen as one entity, with multiple anatomical and physiological interactions between the various compartments (rectum, vagina, uterus and bladder) which are embedded in the same anatomical region. The often complex pathologies of this region should therefore be treated in a multidisciplinary setting.

Besides clinical evaluation, functional dynamic imaging of anorectal and pelvic floor disfunctions has an important role in the diagnosis and management of these disorders. Although the colpocystodefecography is still considered to be the golden standard in imaging this complex anatomical region, there is clearly a need for more precise imaging of the structural details, preferentially without any irradiation. Transperineal ultrasound is an option but the investigators have chosen to evaluate the use of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. In contrast to colpocystodefecography, dynamic pelvic floor magnetic resonance imaging is an evolving technology and its precise role in functional imaging of the pelvic floor still remains to be determined.

Prolapse surgery is commonly performed and therefore it is important to assess the efficacy of the operations in correcting the anatomical defects and the symptoms associated without creating new, pelvic floor related symptoms. Few studies exist today allowing the assessment of the anatomical changes and symptoms after surgery, through abdominal or perineal approach.

This study will evaluate the reliability of the dynamic pelvic floor imaging, done in a sitting position, compared to colpocystodefecography, done in a sitting position. It will also compare clinical objective and subjective results related to pelvic floor abnormalities with imaging. Finally, it will evaluate the anatomical changes in correlation with the clinical results, organ position and inter-compartments relationships after surgery.

This study will allow to understand and explain some relapses and failures and could lead to an improvement of the indications for surgery and surgical techniques used.

02

Conditions studied

  • Prolapse

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • dynamic floor magnetic resonance imaging
  • colpocystodefecagraphy
  • prolapse surgery
03

In context

Prolapse

93 studies on the registry are indexed under Prolapse; 9 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 34 is below the median of 150 across 27 observational studies indexed under Prolapse.

Browse Prolapse studies →

Lead sponsor

Tatiana Besse-Hammer is the lead sponsor of 6 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

All patients who will be operated for symptomatic rectal intussusception or prolapse, enterocele and/or urogenital prolapse, though abdominal and persineal approach as well.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

All patients who will undergo internal or external rectal prolapse, enterocele or urogenital prolapse surgery in CHU Brugmann and CHU St Pierre.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • MRI
  • Patients with prior pelvic floor surgery
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
34 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Prolapse surgery

    Device: Dynamic floor magnetic resonance imaging · Device: Colpocystodefecography

Interventions

  • DeviceDynamic floor magnetic resonance imaging

    Dynamic floor magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)

  • DeviceColpocystodefecography

    Colpocystodefecography (CCD)

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. recto-anal angle -relax position

    Measured by dynamic floor MRI in left lateral decubitus position (141°)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  2. recto-anal angle -retain position

    Measured by dynamic floor MRI in left lateral decubitus position (163°)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  3. recto-anal angle -push position

    Measured by dynamic floor MRI in left lateral decubitus position (165°)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  4. recto-anal angle -relax position

    Measured by dynamic floor MRI in sitting position (141°)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  5. recto-anal angle -retain position

    Measured by dynamic floor MRI in sitting position (125°)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  6. recto-anal angle -push position

    Measured by dynamic floor MRI in sitting position (143°)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  7. Dynamic MRI: anterior compartment

    From the bladder, discrete inferior descent of the pubococcygeal line: max 1/3 (yes/no)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  8. Dynamic MRI: medium compartment

    Vagina horizontalization (yes/no)

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

Secondary outcomes

  1. Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI)

    This is a health tool that describes the severity of different types of incontinence for bowel contents.There are 4 items in the FISI scale with 6 answer choices. Points are awarded according to the gravity of the symptoms. The higher the FISI index (which ranges from 0 to 61), the higher the severity of the fecal incontinence.

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  2. Constipation scoring system (CCS)

    Validated questionnaire. Minimum Score, 0 - Maximum Score, 30

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  3. Prolapse Quality of Life (P-QOL) questionnaire

    Validated questionnaire covering nine domains: general health (1 item), prolapse impact (1 item), role (2 items), physical (2 items) and social limitations (3 items), personal relationships (2 items), emotions (3 items), sleep/energy (2 items), and severity measurement (4 items). The answers are categorized using a fourpoint Likert scale: "none/not at all," "slightly/a little," "moderately," and "a lot." A score is calculated for each domain ranging from 0 to 100. A higher score indicates a greater impairment of quality of life.

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  4. Sexual function questionnaire (PISQ-IR)

    Validated questionnaire. The PISQ-12 measures three domains: behavioral-emotive (items 1 - 4), physical (items 5 - 9) and partner-related (items 10 - 12). It is a self-administered questionnaire, and 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. Higher scores indicate better sexual function.

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

  5. Visual analogic Scale (VAS)

    The VAS scale (EVA in French) is a straight line of 100 mn length. One end is the absence of pain, the other end represents unbearable pain. The patient places a mark between these 2 extremities according to the intensity of his pain at a given time.

    Time frame: 6 months post surgery

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • CHU St Pierre
    Brussels, Belgium
  • CHU Brugmann
    Brussel, 1020, Belgium
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Nov 2017 to primary completion in Oct 2021, 47 months.

Of 14 observational studies under Prolapse, half reached primary completion within 45 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 16 and three quarters within 58. This study's 47 months is close to that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jan 9, 2018
First posted
Jan 17, 2018
StartActual
Nov 1, 2017
Primary completionActual
Oct 26, 2021
CompletionActual
Oct 26, 2021
Last update
Jul 19, 2022
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 19, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03400007
Lead sponsor
Tatiana Besse-Hammer
Responsible party
Tatiana Besse-Hammer (Head of clinic, Brugmann University Hospital) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Jan 17, 2018
Start date
Nov 1, 2017
Primary completion
Oct 26, 2021
Completion
Oct 26, 2021
Last update
Jul 19, 2022

Study contacts

Katleen Jottard, MD
principal investigator · CHU Brugmann

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion