ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06494982Updated Jul 10, 2024

The Influence of Using Vascularized Vaginal Flap on the Efficacy of Mesh-augmented Sacrospinous Hysteropexy

An interventional study of Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh, vaginal flap and anterior colporrhaphy and Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh and anterior colporrhaphy in Pelvic Organ Prolapse, sponsored by Saint Petersburg State University, Russia. Recruiting at 1 site in Russian Federation. Open to female participants aged 45 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-07-10.

Sponsored by Saint Petersburg State University, Russia · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Oct 2024, 2 years 1 month ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started May 2024; still recruiting 2 years 6 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
45 Years to 80 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

This is a prospective randomized controlled trial designed to compare the effectiveness and safety of two methods of pelvic floor reconstruction in patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP): sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) with synthetic mesh, vascularized anterior vaginal wall flap, anterior colporrhaphy, and sacrospinous hysteropexy with synthetic mesh. , anterior colporrhaphy, as well as the impact of surgery on quality of life.

Read the detailed description

BACKGROUND POP is an epidemiologically widespread condition, occurring in 40-60% of women who have given birth. With all the variety of anatomical defects of the pelvic floor, the most common variant is prolapse of the anterior vaginal wall (cystocele).

Of the currently known surgical methods for the treatment of cystocele, anterior colporrhaphy occupies one of the most key places. However, the high recurrence rate of 7-23%, and according to some authors more than 90%, has led to the development of new techniques. In 1997, M. Cosson proposed the "Plastron" method, the essence of which is to close the defect of the pubocervical fascia by fixing a de-epithelialized flap of the anterior vaginal wall to the tendinous arch of the pelvic fascia and then performing anterior colporrhaphy over it. The method was effective in 93.5% of cases in patients with cystocele. At the same time, apical prolapse is present in many women with cystocele. Apical support is important in maintaining normal pelvic floor anatomy. Patients who undergo anterior vaginal wall repair with concomitant repair of the apical defect have a lower risk of reoperation for POP.

There are various methods for restoring apical defects while preserving the uterus. SSHP is the most studied method and was originally performed using sutures. The use of transvaginal mesh for SSHP remains controversial due to the high risk of mesh-associated complications, although many authors report the safety and high effectiveness of the SSHP method using transvaginal mesh. Despite this, the issue of cystocele recurrence after SSHP (with or without mesh) in combination with anterior colporrhaphy remains unresolved.

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 The investigators hypothesis is that is that the use of a deepithelialized vascularized flap of the anterior vaginal wall when performing mesh-augmented sacrospinous hysteropexy and anterior subfascial colporrhaphy reduces the risks of developing relapses of POP in the anterior compartment.

The sample size was calculated taking into account the reported rate of cystocele recurrence using each technique in the literature (6.5% for sacrospinous hysteropexy using vaginal flap vs. 38.7% for mesh-augmented sacrospinous hysteropexy using subfascial colporrhaphy). With a power of 80%, a level of 0,05 and the non-inferiority margin at 15%, the sample size is 50 patients. The investigators assume a drop-out rate of 20%, thus a total of 60 participants will be included in the study.

All enrolled patients will be randomly assigned to SSHP using mesh, vaginal flap and anterior colporrhaphy or SSHP using mesh and anterior colporrhaphy 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 3 qualified surgeons. Postoperative follow-up will be performed 6 and 12 months after surgery by 2 researchers, who will be blinded about the type of intervention.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • pelvic organ prolapse
  • vaginal repair
  • vaginal mesh
  • sacrospinous fixation
  • vaginal flap
03

In context

Pelvic Organ Prolapse

521 studies on the registry are indexed under Pelvic Organ Prolapse; 80 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 60 is below the median of 80 across 336 interventional studies indexed under Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

Browse Pelvic Organ Prolapse studies →

Lead sponsor

Saint Petersburg State University, Russia is the lead sponsor of 34 studies on the registry; 14 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
45 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

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

  • The subject is a woman with anterior and apical compartment pelvic organ prolapse
  • The age of a subject is 45-80 years
  • Leading point of prolapse is at the level of the hymen or distal to the hymen (Ba, C>=1 according to POP-Q classification)
  • The subject gave written consent to participate in the study
  • The subject is able to evaluate the risks of the treatment and make an independent decision on participation in the study
  • The subject is able to fill up validated questionnaires and come to the control visit after the surgery

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • The subject has an active urinary tract infection or skin infection in the region of surgery or acute infectious disease
  • The subject had prior hysterectomy
  • The subject has previously diagnosed or currently active cancer
  • The subject has chronic pelvic pain
  • The subject has cervical elongation
  • The subject has gynecological diseases (recurrent uterine bleeding, endometrial hyperplasia, the presence of atypical cells in cervical smears, adenomyosis, multiple uterine myoma)
  • The subject is planning pregnancy
  • The subject is unable to visit postoperative check-ups
  • Refusal from participation.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
60 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh, vaginal flap and anterior colporrhaphy

    Procedure: Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh, vaginal flap and anterior colporrhaphy

  • Active comparator
    Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh and anterior colporrhaphy

    Procedure: Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh and anterior colporrhaphy

Interventions

  • ProcedureSacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh, vaginal flap and anterior colporrhaphy

    Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh, vaginal flap and anterior colporrhaphy

  • ProcedureSacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh and anterior colporrhaphy

    Sacrospinous hysteropexy with the synthetic mesh and anterior colporrhaphy

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. 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)

    Time frame: 12 months (1 year)

Secondary outcomes

  1. 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).

    Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 months postoperatively, up to 100 weeks

  2. 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.

    Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 months postoperatively, Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 months postoperatively, up to 100 weeks

  3. 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.

    Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 months postoperatively, Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 months postoperatively, up to 100 weeks

  4. 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.

    Time frame: Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 months postoperatively, Measured postoperatively at intervals of 6, 12 months postoperatively, up to 100 weeks

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
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

Started May 2024 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Oct 2024, 5 months after the start.

Of 162 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Pelvic Organ Prolapse, half reached primary completion within 22 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 43. This study's planned 5 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 179 studies reached it within 23 months; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 48.

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

Registered
Mar 25, 2024
First posted
Jul 10, 2024
StartActual
May 1, 2024
Primary completionEst.
Oct 1, 2024
CompletionEst.
Oct 1, 2025
Last update
Jul 10, 2024
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 10, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06494982
Lead sponsor
Saint Petersburg State University, Russia
Responsible party
Shkarupa Dmitry (MD, PhD; Director, St. Petersburg State University Hospital, Saint Petersburg State University, Russia) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jul 10, 2024
Start date
May 1, 2024
Primary completion
Oct 1, 2024 (estimated)
Completion
Oct 1, 2025 (estimated)
Last update
Jul 10, 2024

Study contacts

Denis Suchkov, MD
Contact
denis.urolog@yandex.ru
+79995218976
Rustam Shakhaliev, MD
Contact
rustam.shahaliev@gmail.com
+79312368664
Dmitry Shkarupa, MD, PhD
study chair · Saint Petersburg State University, Russia

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

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